by Buck Rogers, Waking Times:
It’s hard to tell sometimes if art is imitating life, or vice versa. Add to that the fact that we live in a world heavily manipulated by a massive deep state apparatus with unlimited funding to experiment with the weaponization of any and all technology, and you may find yourself wondering if the big screen is trying to send you a wake up call.
“In the future, the technology that controls the weather controls the world.” ~Geostorm
Following in the footsteps of flicks like Independence Day and Armageddon, a new apocalypse-themed, big-budget movie introduces the concept of weaponized weather to the general public. Geostorm, a Warner Brothers and Skydance production coming to the theaters in October of 2017, pitches the classic hero-father against the technology of geoengineering and weather modification.
“After an unprecedented series of natural disasters threatened the planet, the world’s leaders came together to create an intricate network of satellites to control the global climate and keep everyone safe. But now, something has gone wrong — the system built to protect the Earth is attacking it, and it’s a race against the clock to uncover the real threat before a worldwide geostorm wipes out everything…and everyone along with it.” [Source]
The film appears to blend an assassination plot on the president with climate change hype, geoengineering technology, terrorism, mass murder and swashbuckling hero-violence. In one trailer for the film, a Democratic U.S. President tells the world, “Thanks to a system of satellites, we can control our weather.”
“We built this system of satellites to stop natural disasters,” says another character. “This wasn’t some malfunction,” says the leading lady, to which actor Gerard Butler replies, “Someone intentionally did this.”
The preview continues with the following dialogue, which pretty much sums up the current line of thought by independent researchers and analysts who’ve been working for years to expose these weather manipulation programs as technologies of control.
“We built this system of satellites to stop natural disasters. Someone is using it to create them.”
“There’s potential for catastrophic weather events on a global scale. A geostorm!”
“Someone has turned the system into a weapon.”
To build upon the theme of fictionalizing well-documented plans to control global population with all-powerful government programs, Geostorm even features heavily armed United Nations troops in blue helmets coming to the rescue of devastated civilian populations.
Media like this continues the work of normalizing government weather modification, presenting them as necessary evils in a time when human beings are in peril of being consumed by an angry planet. It’s man vs. nature of the highest order.
It’s all fun and games, of course, just entertainment, unless you pit this material against the ever-growing body of public evidence that weather control systems of this nature are already being developed and are in use in our world today. They are slowly being introduced to the public in the mainstream media, framed as survival tools.
Recently, physicist Dr. Michio Kaku acknowledges the plan to fire trillion watt lasers into the sky to control the weather.
The government is building a space fence around earth to encompass the planet in an array of satellites designed to manipulate the electromagnetic energy of the planet and surveil everything. Many have been speculating that recent devastating super storms Harvey, Irma and Jose were influenced by this type of technology.
General Electric was the first organization to pioneer weather modification in the 1940’s, successfully seeding a hurricane, changing its course, and causing major destruction to the east coast of the United States. Since then, the government has developed a broad array of technologies, including HAARP which is widely believed to use scalar technology to manipulate global weather.
The HAARP program was discussed in congress by David Walker, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology and Engineering, who admitted…
from Vigilant Citizen:
The trailer promoting the new Netflix animated series Big Mouth is a cringy experience and highlights a disturbing agenda in mass media: The sexualization of children. Welcome to media madness.
The series features voices from top names in comedy such as John Mulaney, Jordan Peele, Nick Kroll, Maya Rudolph and Fred Armisen. Despite this impressive (and costly) talent roster, the show will most likely be awful and horrifying. Don’t believe me? This trailer should be enough to convince you. The fact that watching this near 3-minutes long trailer actually feels like 30 minutes is not a good sign.
But here it is. If you’re up for it. You don’t have to watch it.
Here are some lowlights from that trailer.
A horned “hormone monster” (voiced by a grown man) appears in the bedroom of two prepubescent boys and causes one of them to ejaculate.
A father creepily tells his boy that he could “kiss a penis very lightly”.
This prebuscent girl talks to her vagina.
The trailer ends with the monster jokingly saying that Netflix insisted on having this messed up stuff on the series. There is actually truth to that.
It only took a few years for Netflix to become one of the world’s largest content creators. This year alone, Netflix is projected to spend over $6 billion dollars in the creation of content.
Of course, with great budget and exposure comes great agenda pushing. A great number of recent Netflix productions are heavily tainted with strong social and political messages – and straight up propaganda.
For instance, the Netflix series Bill Nye Saves the World drew severe criticism for bending actual science to cater to specific agenda (read my article about the episode “The Sexual Spectrum” to understand how obvious this was).
For some bizarre, disturbing and upsetting reason, the sexualization of children is also part of that agenda. Slowly but surely, new content keeps pushing the envelope, slightly going too far, chipping away at moral decency to make the sexuality of children fair game.
Why? Because Hollywood and the world elite are full of children lovers and they want to normalize their derangement.
from Zero Hedge:
As if the public needed any more evidence that violence is a central part of Antifa’s mission, conservative comedian Steve Crowder has published footage that he and his producer surreptitiously recorded after infiltrating a local Antifa cell and accompanying it to a protest at the University of Utah.
The shockingly candid footage offers a disturbing glimpse into the innerworkings of Antifa – a loosely organized band of far-left agitators – and the central tenant of violent resistance that encapsulates the group’s philosophy. The footage primarily focuses on a transgender woman, the purported leader of a small cell of Antifa protesters, who can be heard telling Crowder’s producer that she’s armed with a handgun, and that she expects reinforcements to arrive later with “two AKs”. The organizer can also be heard recommending that Crowder’s producer buy a small blade at a military surplus store and strap it to his ankle “just in case.”
What they show appears to confirm that the group protesters were planning to disrupt a speaking event hosted by conservative commentator and Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro, whom Antifa has accused of being a nazi despite the fact that he is Jewish. Shapiro’s recent appearances at UC Berkeley and other university campuses drew protests, with demonstrators labeling him a “fascist.”
But perhaps the most surprising thing about the footage was the fact that mainstream media reporters AND police essentially told Crowder & Co. to get lost when they shared it with them.
In another shocking excerpt, the Antifa leader – whom Crowder didn’t name because he said he didn’t want to “dox” anybody, though he added that police have confirmed that they have been monitoring her – described a plan to lure right-wing demonstrators to a secluded area where, presumably, they would be attacked by Antifa.
“Plain clothes, hard tactics, I don’t think they’ll know what hit them. Because they’re not prepared for what we’re planning,” the organizer says at one point.
In the video, another unnamed Antifa member who goes by the pseudonym Clark can be heard explaining that the difference between Antifa and other activist groups is a “willingness to respond with violence.”
As we’ve reported time and time again, Antifa protesters have been inciting violence across the country since Trump’s upset victory in November, beginning with protests during Trump’s inauguration that quickly turned violent in destructive.
According to Fox 13 News in Salt Lake City, Crowder published the undercover video Thursday that purports to show far left-wing protesters distributing weapons ahead of the speech. Crowder’s production team presented the video to police moments after it was recorded.
Yet after evaluating the video, the police determined that there was no credible threat.
“Police looked at the video, evaluated other information available to them, and determined the individuals did not pose a credible threat that warranted action,” Nelson told Fox 13 News.
Similarly violent clashes instigated by members of the far-left group erupted on the campus of UC Berkeley in early February, where members of the group hurled Molotov cocktails and attacked “facists” and “nazis” who were attending a speaking event by Milo Yiannopoulos, causing extensive property damage on campus.
While both the mainstream media and more mainstream leftists initially defended the group, public sentiment has soured on the group.
Several media organizations – including the LA Times, Washington Post, the Atlantic, Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal – have criticized the group’s violent tactics. A month ago, it was reported that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security classified Antifa as a “domestic terrorist” group in internal communications that described them as “primary instigators of violence at public rallies” going back to at least April 2016 when the reports were first published.”
He was sentenced to three years in prison for abusing the 12-year-old child star of his debut film
by Jacob Stolworthy, Independent:
It has emerged that a director once convicted of child molestation in 1988 incorporated jokes about child sex abuse into his new film.
Victor Salva – director of the Jeepers Creepers franchise – was sentenced to three years in prison in 1988 for abusing the 12-year-old child star of his film Clownhouse at the age of 30 as well as filming the molestation and possession of child pornography. He served just 15 months.
It’s now emerged that new film Jeepers Creepers 3 originally featured a scene hinting at the sexual abuse between a 13-year-old runaway, played by 21-year-old actress Gabrielle Haugh, and her stepfather through an exchange which sees one character sympathise with her molester.
“Can you blame the step-dad, though?” one character can be heard saying. “I mean, look at her. The heart wants what it wants, am I right?”
Critics have pointed out the disturbing exchange having witnessed the scene in advanced screener copies, however, the scene has been subsequently removed from the public version.
Speaking about his abuse, actor Nathan Forrest Winters said of Salva: “He spent the better part of a year grooming me and my parents. Developing the trust. It was very calculated, and a long process, as it is with most paedophiles.”
Winters, who is currently working on a documentary about his molestation and paedophilia in Hollywood, said: “The film will show my journey from victim to survivor. It is my belief that we as a whole in this country have been too afraid to face such an unspeakable topic and continue to turn a blind eye, which has allowed these predators of our children to go unchecked for too long.”
by Alex Thomas, The Daily Sheeple:
New reports from multiple sources have revealed that White House Chief of Staff General John Kelly is actively working to stop President Trump from even learning about the possibility of a deal between the United States and Julian Assange which would then allow the Wikileaks founder to provide evidence that the DNC hacks did not come from Russia.
Republican California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher made a controversial trip in August to meet the infamous Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he has been forced to live for years due to literal fake charges in Sweden that were filed in an obvious attempt at hurting a man that was directly exposing some of the biggest intelligence secrets ever.
At the time Rohrabacher told The Daily Caller that, “Assange promised him information that reveals Russia is not behind the hacking and leaking of Democratic National Committee emails during the 2016 election, as U.S. intelligence officials have claimed.”
The DC report continued:
Rohrabacher said that a pardon would likely have to occur for Assange to give up this information about the source of the DNC emails. Assange has long maintained that he would never reveal a source, but Rohrabacher said that Assange now “wants to get out of the Ecuadorian embassy.”
To recap, a Republican Congressman has set up the possibility that Assange could provide the specific information that the Trump White House needs to destroy the fake Russian narrative once and for all. One would assume that any Trump ally, especially those within his inner circl,e would jump at such an opportunity.
Unfortunately, according to reports, the presidents own chief of staff has worked to stop him from even finding out about the possibility of pardoning Assange in exchange for proof that Russia did not give Wikileaks the DNC emails.
The congressman spoke to chief of staff John Kelly two weeks ago about the potential deal with Assange. The Wall Street Journal reported that Kelly told Rohrabacher to bring the information to the intelligence community.
“This would have to be a cooperative effort between his own staff and the leadership in the intelligence communities to try to prevent the president from making the decision as to whether or not he wants to take the steps necessary to expose this horrendous lie that was shoved down the American people’s throats so incredibly earlier this year,” Rohrabacher said.
Keep in mind that Trump told reporters Sunday that he hadn’t even heard about the Assange possibility. In other words, Kelly has stopped that from even reaching the presidents desk while at the same time telling Rohrabacher to take this key information to the very intelligence community that is conducting the Russian narrative operation in the first place.
It is also important to note that we already know that Kelly has specifically worked to stop President Trump from reading any material from websites such as this one, Infowars, Breitbart, and even The Daily Caller.
As the New York Times happily reported in early September:
“Mr. Kelly cannot stop Mr. Trump from binge-watching Fox News, which aides describe as the president’s primary source of information gathering,” the Times report said. “But Mr. Trump does not have a web browser on his phone, and does not use a laptop, so he was dependent on aides like Stephen K. Bannon, his former chief strategist, to hand-deliver printouts of articles from conservative media outlets.”
“Now Mr. Kelly has thinned out his package of printouts so much that Mr. Trump plaintively asked a friend recently where The Daily Caller and Breitbart were.”
Read More @ TheDailySheeple.com
from Dollar Vigilante:
by James Howard Kunstler, Russia Insider:
“This homework assignment should be given to the Democratic members of congress, since they are otherwise preoccupied only with hunting for Russian gremlins and discovering new sexual abnormalities to protect and defend.”
Poor old Karl Marx, tortured by boils and phantoms, was right about one thing: History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. Thus, I give you the Roman Empire and now the United States of America. Rome surrendered to time and entropy. Our method is to drive a gigantic clown car into a ditch.
Is anyone out there interested in redemption? I have an idea for the political party out of power, the Democrats, sunk in its special Okefenokee Swamp of identity politics and Russia paranoia: make an effort to legislate the Citizens United calamity out of existence. Who knows, a handful of Republicans may be shamed into going along with it. For those of you who have been mentally vacationing on Mars with Elon Musk, Citizens United was a Supreme Court decision — Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 558 U.S. 310 (2010) — which determined that corporations had the right, as hypothetical “persons,” to give as much money as they liked to political candidates.
This “right” devolved from the First Amendment of the constitution, the 5-4 majority opinion said — giving money to political candidates and causes amounts to “freedom of speech.” The Citizens United ruling opened the door for unlimited election spending by corporations and enormous mischief in our national life. Then-President Obama — a constitutional law professor before his career in politics — complained bitterly about the opinion days later in his State of the Union address, saying that the court had “reversed a century of law to open the floodgates, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.”
And for the next seven years he did absolutely nothing about it, nor did the Democratic Party majority in congress. Rather, they vacuumed in as much corporate campaign money as possible from every hokey political action committee (PAC) from sea to shining sea, especially in the 2016 presidential election starring Hillary “It’s My Turn” Clinton. It turned out to not be her turn in large part because the voters noticed the stench of corruption wafting off this toxic flow of corporate money, which Hillary was using to vastly outspend her billionaire opponent, troll that he was.
Of course, corporations have not always been what they are deemed to be today. They evolved with the increasingly complex activities of industrial economies. Along the way — in Great Britain first, actually — they were deemed to exist as the equivalent of legal persons, to establish that the liabilities of the company were separate and distinct from those of its owners. In the USA, forming a corporation usually required an act of legislation until the late 19th century. After that, they merely had to register with the states. Then congress had to sort out the additional problems of giant “trusts” and holding companies (hence, anti-trust laws, now generally ignored).
In short, the definition of what a corporation is and what it has a right to do is in a pretty constant state of change as economies evolve. And insofar as the current economy is sinking like the USS Titanic — and our republic as a mode of governance with it — surely the time has come to redefine in legislation the role and existential nature of a corporation in this polity. This homework assignment should be given to the Democratic members of congress, since they are otherwise preoccupied only with hunting for Russian gremlins and discovering new sexual abnormalities to protect and defend.
The crux of the argument is that corporations cannot be said to be entirely and altogether the equivalent of persons for all legal purposes. In law, corporations have duties, obligations, and responsibilities to their shareholders first, and only after that to the public interest or the common good, and only then by pretty strict legal prescription. It may be assumed that the interests of corporations and their shareholders are in opposition to, and in conflict with, the public interest. And insofar as elections are fundamentally matters of the public interest, corporations must be prohibited from efforts to influence the outcome of elections.
That’s your assignment Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of the Democratic Party leadership. Get serious. Show a little initiative. Do something useful. Draw up some legislation.
Get behind something real that might make a difference in this decrepitating country.
Read More @ Russia-Insider.com
by James Holbrooks, Activist Post:
Through a trio of search warrants, the Department of Justice (DoJ) is demanding Facebook hand over the personal information of potentially 6,000 of its users, it was revealed Thursday.
According to CNN, which obtained court documents pertaining to the case, the DoJ warrants target the accounts of three “anti-administration activists who have spoken out at organized events, and who are generally very critical of this administration’s policies.”
That description comes from the three users’ attorneys, CNN reports. It all stems from arrests made in Washington, D.C. on the day of Donald Trump’s inauguration back in January, following what the government claims were riots.
The warrants were served to Facebook in February, but a gag order prevented the social media giant from alerting the three users to the government’s intentions until the order was lifted in mid-September.
Once alerted, the users contacted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which now represents them.
“What is particularly chilling about these warrants is that anti-administration political activists are going to have their political associations and views scrutinized by the very administration they are protesting,” the ACLU’s Scott Michelman told CNN.
One of the warrants is for Emmelia Talarico, who ran the disruptj20 page where much of the anti-Trump protesting was organized. The other two are for Facebook users Lacy MacAuley and Legba Carrefour.
If Facebook complies with the DoJ’s request, it will mean the federal government will have access to the personal data — including private messages — of the nearly 6,000 users who simply “liked” the disruptj20 page.
In the ACLU’s motion to quash the warrants, filed with the D.C. Superior Court on Thursday, Michelman notes the type of data the government is seeking to obtain. From one of the warrants:
All profile information; News Feed information; status updates; links to videos, photographs, or other web content; Notes; Wall postings; Comments; Friend lists, including the friends’ Facebook user ID numbers; groups and networks joined by the Account, including the Facebook group ID numbers; event postings; and pending and rejected ‘Friend’ requests.
He sums it all up as such:
In short, the warrants sought a complete record of anything the three users communicated or received from a third party via Facebook, everyone with whom the users associated via Facebook, and everything the users searched for on Facebook, during the specified time period.
That time period is from November of 2016, just before the presidential election, and February 9 of this year, when the warrants were served to Facebook.
Read More @ ActivistPost.com