The WHO Will Have Authority To Mandate Vaccines Globally

In the video above, John Campbell, Ph.D., a retired nurse educator, reviews the proposed amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), which is the instrument that empowers the World Health Organization to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).

If these amendments go through, however, the WHO will be empowered to do a whole lot more than that. It will become the de facto governing body of all member states, including the U.S.

Now, according to so-called “fact checkers,” the WHO will have no authority to dictate U.S. health policy under the amended IHR or the proposed pandemic treaty, nor will nations be stripped of their sovereignty.1 But they’re completely wrong. The only reason they’re denying these truths is because they don’t want the public to pressure government to reject these proposals, as they should.

As noted by Campbell and others, including bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, Ph.D., and researcher James Roguski,2 the pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments are obviously written by experts in both national and international law and appear “airtight.”

There’s simply no doubt that, as currently written, these instruments will be legally binding and will supersede local and national laws. They even include enforcement tools to ensure that member nations comply with the WHO’s edicts.

Another false propaganda angle is that these instruments only apply to infectious disease pandemics, but that isn’t true either. Areas of life that are being added in under the umbrella of “health” include climate, food production and even poverty, so the WHO will be able to claim sole global authority over anything to do with those issues as well.

In his video, Campbell goes through several of the proposed IHR amendments, and how they will impact national sovereignty and public health decisions. The article-by-article compilation of the proposed amendments3 can be found here.

Strikethroughs in the text indicate that the text is to be deleted, and the additions or revisions are underlined in bold. The following are some of the most disconcerting amendments, copied with the deletions and insertions of text showing.

New IHR Will Be Binding and Can Apply to Anything

Article 1 Definitions — “‘standing recommendation’ means non-binding advice issued by WHO for specific ongoing public health risks pursuant to Article 16 regarding appropriate health measures for routine or periodic application needed to prevent or reduce the international spread of disease and minimize interference with international traffic;

‘temporary recommendation’ means non-binding advice issued by WHO pursuant to Article 15 for application on a time-limited, risk-specific basis, in response to a public health emergency of international concern, so as to prevent or reduce the international spread of disease and minimize interference with international traffic.”

Since the word “non-binding” is removed, this means that any recommendation from the WHO will be binding and member states will be required to follow the WHO’s recommendations.

Article 2 Scope and Purpose — “The purpose and scope of these Regulations are to prevent, protect against, prepare, control and provide a public health response to the international spread of diseases including through health systems readiness and resilience in ways that are commensurate with and restricted to public health risk

all risks with a potential to impact public health, and which avoid unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade, livelihoods, human rights, and equitable access to health products and health care technologies and know how.”

This really opens the door for the WHO to take over for just about any reason. It doesn’t even have to be a real public health threat. It could be a potential, unproven or suspected threat.

Human Dignity, Rights and Freedoms Will Not Be Factored In

Article 3 Principles — “The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.”

In other words, bodily autonomy and personal choice are being replaced by one-size-fits-all medicine that has no regard for human dignity, human rights or fundamental freedoms. The right to so much as an opinion will also be removed on the national level.

Article 10 Verification — “If the State Party does not accept the offer of collaboration within 48 hours , WHO may shall , when justified by the magnitude of the public health risk, immediately share with other States Parties the information available to it, whilst encouraging the State Party to accept the offer of collaboration by WHO, taking into account the views of the State Party concerned.”

So, if the WHO suspects that an outbreak within a nation might pose an international threat, but the nation in question doesn’t want to collaborate with the WHO, the WHO will immediately tell the other members about the suspected threat, which will put pressure on the uncooperative nation, and the views of that nation will be deemed irrelevant.

Other amendments within this and other articles also specifically remove any involvement of the nation in the WHO’s decision-making. Article 13 below is but one example. As noted by Campbell, the director-general is repeatedly specified as the sole authority when it comes to making assessments and decisions. The director-general can also impose sanctions on nations that refuse to follow his dictates.4

How can a single person be given the authority to make decisions for the entire world? This kind of authoritarian top-down system can only damage public health, as public health is best served by local decision makers that have access to local data.

Director-General Can Act Unilaterally on Mere Suspicion

Article 12 Determination of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern, or Intermediate Health Alert — “If the Director-General considers, based on an assessment under these Regulations, that a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern is occurring, the Director-General shall notify all States Parties and seek to consult with the State Party in whose territory the event arises regarding this preliminary determination …”

The key problem here is the addition of “potential or actual.” The WHO can take over if the director-general has a mere suspicion that a health emergency might be brewing. The threat doesn’t have to be real or evident.

Article 13 Public Health Response — At the request of a State Party, WHO shall collaborate articulate clearly defined assistance to a State Party offer assistance to a State Party in the response to public health risks and other events by providing technical guidance , health products, technologies, know-how, deployment of civil medical personals, and assistance and by assessing the effectiveness of the control measures in place, including the mobilization of international teams of experts for on-site assistance …”

Again, input from the member state will not be accepted. It’s no longer about collaborating with the WHO on health emergencies. It’s about obeying it. The WHO will independently decide what’s to be done. The WHO may also send in its own medical personnel to address the situation.

Newly Added Articles

Several new articles have also been added to flesh out and describe the WHO’s authority, and what member states must do to comply with this new top-down order. Here are two telling ones.

NEW Article 13A WHO Led International Public Health Response — “States [sic] Parties recognize WHO as the guidance and coordinating authority of international public health response during public health Emergency of International Concern and undertake to follow WHO’s recommendations in their international public health response.”

In other words, member nations shall bow down to the WHO and do as they’re told. A newly added Article 53 goes on to detail how each member nation must implement a compliance committee to ensure the WHO’s directives are adhered to and executed.

New Article 13A Access to Health Products, Technologies and Know-How for Public Health Response — “1. Immediately after the determination of a public health emergency of international concern under Article 12, the Director General shall make an immediate assessment of availability and affordability of required health products and make recommendations, including an allocation mechanism, to avoid any potential shortages of health products and technologies …

3. States Parties shall provide, in their intellectual property laws and related laws and regulations, exemptions and limitations to the exclusive rights of intellectual property holders to facilitate the manufacture, export and import of the required health products, including their materials and components.”

So, once a PHEIC is announced, the director-general will lay claim to all medical resources within the member states. Other additions also spell out that the WHO will control:5

  • The local production of health products
  • Cell lines used in the production of biotherapeutics and vaccines
  • Biosurveillance
  • Censorship of “false and unreliable information” about public health events, preventive strategies and pandemic countermeasures
  • Intellectual property
  • Allocation of medical resources
  • Development of regulatory guidelines for the fast-tracking of health products
  • A global health database (which is required for the implementation of vaccine passports)

IHR Amendment Greenlights Conflicts of Interest

The amendments also plainly allow for conflicts of interest that might harm public health. Under Article 9, the WHO can declare a public health emergency based on information from undisclosed sources. Those sources could include Big Pharma, WHO funders such as the Gates Foundation and the Gates-founded-and-funded GAVI Alliance, or any number of other players with conflicts of interest.

As reported by The Defender,6 “One of the biggest changes the WHO has seen in its 75-year history is a shift from funding from sovereign nations to funding from private parties.”

At present, the majority of the WHO’s funding comes from Bill Gates, through donations from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). Gates also funds the World Economic Forum, and his nonprofits are taking money from drug companies.

What this means is that Gates and drug companies wield enormous power over the WHO. It’s not even close to being independent. A majority of the WHO’s funding is also “specified,” meaning it’s earmarked for particular programs. So, the WHO cannot allocate those funds wherever they’re needed most, and this also massively influences what the WHO does and how it does it.

There’s no getting around this point: The WHO is an organization that does whatever its funders want it to do, and that does not bode well for global health, considering medical errors are already a leading cause of death, and have been for decades. The IHR amendments basically open the door wide to mass medical experimentation on humanity without informed consent, and if the COVID pandemic is any indication, nothing good will come from that.

PHEIC Definition Expanded to Include Just About Anything

The amendments also radically expand the situations that can constitute a PHEIC. A PHEIC is currently defined as an “extraordinary event” in one country that constitutes “a public health risk to other states through the international spread of disease and to potentially require a coordinated international response.”

Amendments seek to expand and broaden this definition to include things like clusters of infection with potential but unverified human-to-human transmission. The actual risks of such clusters don’t even need to be evaluated. What’s more, the proposed definition of a PHEIC does not specify that it must involve “severe” or “life-threatening” disease, so it could be invoked for just about anything.

One of the amendments also suggests giving the director-general the ability to declare an “intermediate public health alert” when the situation doesn’t fully meet the PHEIC criteria. In such an event, the director-general and/or a regional WHO director would be able to declare a public health emergency of regional concern (PHERC).7

As suggested by Campbell, to really understand what they’re trying to do here, browse through the Article by Article Compilation of Proposed Amendments8 for yourself. Most definitely, don’t believe the “fact checkers” who say there’s nothing to see here.

Treaty Will Expand WHO’s Power Beyond Pandemics

As mentioned earlier, when you add in the proposed pandemic treaty, the WHO’s powers expand even further, because in addition to expanding emergency powers during pandemics, the treaty also emphasizes the “One Health9,10 agenda, and that covers just about everything you can think of.

As illustrated in the graphic11 below, the One Health agenda is based on the premise that a broad range of aspects of life and the environment can impact health and therefore fall under the “potential” to cause harm.

This graphic below isn’t comprehensive. The scope of One Health, according to a One Health Commission document,12 also includes communications, economics, civil society, global trade, commerce and security, public policy and regulation, research, noncommunicable diseases, agricultural land use (which involves forcing farmers off their land), disaster preparedness and response, disease surveillance, the “human-animal bond” (whatever that means) and much more.

Under the new treaty, the WHO will have unilateral power to make decisions about all of these areas, and its dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state and federal laws. For example, under One Health, the WHO will be able to declare climate change as a health emergency and implement climate lockdowns to address it.

One Health Is Part of The Great Reset Agenda

One Health basically mirrors The Great Reset agenda. It just uses a different name and justifies all these Great Reset changes as a means to “protect health.” Not surprisingly, One Health is financed and promoted by a long list of Great Reset backers, including the United Nations, the European Union and various U.S. federal agencies,13,14 the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, the Wellcome Trust, UNICEF, CEPI, the World Economic Forum and the World Bank.

But while these entities are officially funding the pandemic industry, what’s really happening is they’re using taxes to fund wealthy people, who in turn exploit the poor. It’s as far from philanthropic as you can get.

Taxpayers are providing the money while private profiteers are deciding how that money is spent, and it’s being spent in ways that will benefit themselves. So, it’s a private-public “partnership” where the public is being robbed and all the benefits go to the private sector.

As reported by Paraschiva Florescu and Rob Verkerk Ph.D., with the Alliance for Natural Health International:15

“The One Health approach is aligned with WHO’s linear and reductionist thinking that seeks to distill all potential solutions to one view of the underlying science, one view on the necessary medicines, and only one truth.

This monolithic approach spells grave dangers for humanity given that it is bottom-up, decentralized, regionally specific approaches to complex health problems that have always been shown to work. Top-down, “one size fits all” approaches, especially ones twisted by conflicted interests, are doomed to failure.

Only those who fail to look at the wider scientific picture are prepared to convince themselves that the WHO’s first global attempt at managing a pandemic, involving masks, lockdowns and genetic vaccines, was a success.

At its core, the WHO’s extended powers will lead to even more censorship and will dismantle the notion of consensus science built on a transparent, scientific method …

Without an international uprising by the grassroots, these amendments will go ahead. Our silence and passivity are our consent. It is, without question, part of the slow descent into totalitarianism, taking us further and further away from principles and values that have characterized many civilizations over recent millennia, namely the right to liberty, the rights of the individual, and the importance of national sovereignty.”

To learn more, check out the Stop Vax Passports Task Force webinar on One Health,16 available on

Global Threat Detection Network Launched

Already, the WHO has launched a global threat detection network, the International Pathogen Surveillance Network (IPSN), to “help protect people from infectious disease threats through the power of pathogen genomics.”17 Apparently, it fully expects to be granted all the powers that the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty will impart.

This network will be used to collect and analyze pathogenic samples, which in turn will drive the WHO’s public health decisions. As described in a press release:18

“The IPSN, with a Secretariat hosted by the WHO Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Intelligence, brings together experts worldwide at the cutting-edge of genomics and data analytics, from governments, philanthropic foundations, multilateral organizations, civil society, academia and the private sector.

All share a common goal: to detect and respond to disease threats before they become epidemics and pandemics, and to optimize routine disease surveillance …

COVID-19 highlighted the critical role pathogen genomics plays in responding to pandemic threats. Without the rapid sequencing of the SARS-COV-2 genome, vaccines would not have been as effective, or have been made available so quickly.

New, more transmissible variants of the virus would not have been as quickly identified. Genomics lies at the heart of effective epidemic and pandemic preparedness and response, as well as part of the ongoing surveillance of a vast range of diseases, from foodborne diseases and influenza to tuberculosis and HIV.”

The problem, of course, is that the COVID “vaccines,” developed at warp speed using genomic sequencing, were neither effective nor safe. Many have died within two weeks of getting their jab, and after several months, the effectiveness become negative. This is the technology they now want to use for everything. The risks moving this agenda forward are near-incomprehensible.

So, to summarize and recap, the globalist takeover hinges on the successful creation of a feedback loop of surveillance for virus variants, declaration of potential risk followed by lockdowns and restrictions, followed by mass vaccinating populations to “end” the pandemic restrictions, followed by more surveillance and so on. The funding for this scheme comes primarily from taxpayers, while the profits go to corporations and their investors.

Current Timeline

Once the amendments are adopted by the World Health Assembly, nations will have only a limited time to reject them. Any nation that hasn’t officially rejected the amendments will then be legally bound by them, and any attempt to reject them after the six-month grace period will be null and void.

As it currently stands, the IHR amendments will be voted on in the World Health Assembly (WHA) in May 2024. They only need a majority vote to pass. If that vote happens as planned, then the 10-month deadline for member states to reject the amendments will expire in March 2025, and the amendments will come into force in May 2025. If a member state opts out, then the current 2005 IHR version will apply to that state.

The WHO pandemic treaty will also be voted on by the WHA in May 2024. It requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and 30 member countries to ratify it. Thirty days after ratification, the treaty will take force for the countries that signed it.

Bill Introduced to Require Senate Approval, but Is It Enough?

Fortunately, the U.S. Senate is not entirely clueless about the ramifications of this treaty, and 17 Republican senators, led by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., have introduced a bill to thwart the WHO’s power grab.19

The “No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act,”20 introduced February 15, 2023, would require a Senate supermajority (two-thirds or 67 senators) to pass the pandemic treaty.

However, according to Boyle,21 an expert on international laws and treaties, even this bill might not be enough to protect us were President Biden to sign the treaty. The reason for this is because the treaty is written “specifically to circumvent the Senate-approval process.”

A far more effective strategy, he says, would be for Congress to withhold its annual contributions to the WHO — and then withdraw the U.S. from the WHO altogether.

I believe it may be worth supporting all of these strategies. So, please, contact your representatives and urge them to support the “No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act,” to withhold funding for the WHO and, ultimately, support U.S. withdrawal from the WHO.

Sources and References

The post The WHO Will Have Authority To Mandate Vaccines Globally appeared first on LewRockwell.

Welcome To The Apocalypse

With Pride Month starting in a week we can expect to be treated to a smörgåsbord of Corporate Wokeness the likes of which we’ve never seen before – and it’s already started.

Journalist Glenn Greenwald, who is openly gay and tragically who is now the widowed father of two teenage boys living in Brazil recently posted a very revealing Twitter thread that speaks to what venture capitalist, David Sacks calls the “Hegemony of the Professional Class”, which is interesting because Glenn has always been politically on the Left:

A newly released Harris-Harvard poll conclusively demonstrates how radically out of touch that the liberal corporate media is with the views of Americans. It’s not just that corporate media rejects Americans’ views. They don’t permit those views to be heard.

To start: Majorities of Americans say it’s *false* that Trump colluded with Russia. The the Steele Dossier is also “false.” In other words, they view the story the US media aggressively centered for 3 years as a hoax and a fraud, yet NBC and CNN won’t even air this view.

Americans also believe that the materials on the Hunter Biden laptop are real, and are not and never were “Russian disinformation.” So again, Americans view the claim that the US corporate media and CIA spread for weeks before the 2020 election – to help Biden win – as a fraud.

Majorties of Americans also believe: * Hunter Biden engaged in criminal influence peddling using his father’s name. * The FBI is not investigating these crimes. * Joe Biden participated in Hunter’s illegal influence peddling and profiteering schemes.

*Large majorities* of Americans say they are not surprised to learn the FBI abused it power in the 2016 Trum/Russia probe to help Biden. *Large majorities* also say they are deeply worried about the US Security State’s manipulation of US politics, and sweeping reform is needed.

Large majorities of Americans have serious doubts about Biden’s mental fitness to be President, and believe he is too old.

Unsurprisingly, then, Trump leads Biden by 7 points for 2024, and Kamala Harris by 11 points. Can the media be more out-of-touch?

The 3 political figures who are viewed most favorably by Americans are Elon Musk, Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis (Berne is next). Musk has by far the highest favorability gap (+14). AOC’s is -13, Mitch McConnell -24. Tim Scott and Vivek are +7.

Only 40% of Dem voters say they intend to vote for Biden *in the Dem primary.” For whatever reason, the poll excluded the challenger near 20%: RFK, Jr. But even many Dems say Biden lacks mental fitness and they don’t want to vote for him.

What’s so striking here isn’t that the corporate media relentlessly advocates views and ideologies that majorities of Americans – often large majorities – reject. It’s that the views held by majorities are all but banned on NBC, CNN, NYT and WPost. Thus, this is not a mystery.

As for the gay community in the US and throughout the West, most gays already have all of the same rights as straight people. Gays can get married and have children. 85% of people throughout the Americas are living in jurisdictions providing marriage rights to same-sex couples. Gays occupy high positions of power in all public and private sectors and many have done so openly for decades – despite what the Biden Regime would have you think.

So what, exactly is this messaging all about? 

It’s called 5th Generation Warfare. They don’t give a damn about gay pride or trans rights. They are running this massively divisive PSYOP to drive everybody crazy. The mega corporations are being forced to participate in these Baphomet rituals in order to abide by the World Economic Forum’s ESG and DEI commandments or they will lose access to credit. Companies that do not comply with the WEF’s criteria per a KPMG audit are heavily fined, their Moody’s rating lowered, and their ability to obtain bank loans is destroyed.

Major corporations are being forced to self-destruct in order to maintain their credit ratings, as part of the same Orchestrated Civilizational Collapse that is shutting down the farms, blowing up the food processing plants, turning off the pipelines and the power plants and imposing zero carbon on a planet of carbon-based life forms.

This past Tuesday, France passed a law banning several short haul domestic flights. Air France had already canceled several routes that were deemed too high on carbon emissions. They did this back in 2020, in return for coronavirus financial assistance from the government. See how this works?

These are the same banksters who orchestrated the COVID PSYOP and the genocide jab. These are the same banksters who want to round you up into a 15-minute gulag/city. These are the same banksters tracking the food purchases of New Yorkers and imposing restrictions on the consumption of meat.

These are the same banksters who are sterilizing the next generation of children with “gender-affirming care” and grooming them by stocking school libraries with gay pornography. In short, these are the same banksters who want to kill you and erase you from the surface of the Earth.

Another important aspect of constantly shoving the drag queens down your throat is that it serves as a major distraction. This is why we must always be asking ourselves, “what is all of this distracting us from?”

For one, it’s a distraction from the fact that the American power establishment partnered with the communist Chinese government to build a New World Order;

There’s also the whole-of-government project to import tens of millions of weaponized Third World migrants into the country and how the US Government is actively involved in the business of sex trafficking and organ-harvesting migrant children.

AM radio host, Michael Savage did some investigating and found that at full occupancy, the Chinese-owned Holiday Inn hotel in Midtown Manhattan will receive from US and NY Taxpayers $3 million per month to house illegal migrants in the most expensive real estate market in the world.

Then there’s the IRS investigator — who was recently removed from the highly-sensitive probe, in what he believes was an act of retaliation — was scheduled to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee in a closed-door meeting on Friday.

Gary Shapley appeared on “CBS Evening News” Tuesday to say that prosecutors mishandled an ongoing tax evasion probe into Hunter Biden, speaking publicly for the first time. He felt he had no choice but to go public with his accusations that the probe was stymied.

Following the purge on Tuesday of the entire investigatory team looking into Joe Biden’s son for tax fraud and related crimes, second IRS whistleblower in the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden emerged on Wednesday, in documents sent to Congress.

Also, we have FBI Director Chris Wray is being charged with contempt of Congress, which has jurisdiction over him for refusing to produce unclassified documents that allegedly detail the Biden Crime Family’s illegal schemes.

In a functioning legal system, past directors of the CIA, FBI and a host of politicians, including a former president would now be in jail for Treason.

Oh yeah, and Russia is winning the war in Ukraine.

An algorithm was discovered hidden in New York’s voter rolls. The algorithm links county voter identification and State Board of Elections identification numbers to create a third ID number or a clone. This causes total voter registrations to increase – not due to real people registering to vote but due to algorithms cloning them. Rolls inflate. This explains, in part where the fraudulent votes are coming from. The algorithm shuffles the data to make everything look random but it is absolutely deterministic and reversible and therefore, provable.

With what else will we be distracted, to prevent justice from being served?

Mike Davis (who should be appointed as Attorney General some day soon) believes that Special Counsel Jack Smith will indict Trump and that the reason for the unprecedented, unnecessary, unlawful raid on former president was to get back Trump’s declassified Crossfire Hurricane records – which are very much in his rights to have under the Presidential Records Act, however they are so damning for Obama, Biden, Hillary that the Deep State had to stop it.

Jeffrey Prather says that intelligence indications across the special operations and intelligence veterans networks indicate a possible government grid down false flag in September, possibly against our nuclear facilities, using the stolen 30 tons of ammonium nitrate that recently went missing from a rail shipment in California.

Jeffrey believes this potential false flag attack engineered by our corrupt government will be used to justify more tyranny and control. He assesses that some of these military-aged men coming across the border, including Chinese special forces may be engaged to execute this attack and that we may see UN Blue Helmet troops brought in, which he believes will be the final straw to activate every biker, redneck, cowboy and tough guy in America and then the hot war will be on.

And now, it’s time for your Moment of Zen

Reprinted with the author’s permission.

The post Welcome To The Apocalypse appeared first on LewRockwell.

Neo-Nazism and the War in Ukraine: Interview With Michel Chossudovsky

The West’s support of Neo-Nazism in Ukraine should come as no surprise. Historically, powerful U.S. financial interests not only supported Nazi Germany as well as Bandera Nazism in Ukraine. In some regards the totalitarian practice of Neo-nazism is akin to the doctrine of the Neocons as formulated in the Project of the New American Century (PNAC). 

And Serbia, Beware, you are the only country in Europe which has courageously stood up against US pressures.

This and much more is revealed in this interview with Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, economist, professor emeritus at the University of Ottawa and editor of the renowned anti-globalist Global Research website.


Dragan Vujicic: How do you view the war between Ukraine and Russia?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky: The war in Ukraine ended before it began. The Russians literally destroyed their Air Force and Navy at the very outset in February-March 2022.

Also Russia has strategic control over a large part of the Black Sea and total control of the Sea of Azov. Turkey which is a NATO heavyweight is an unspoken ally of Russia. Turkey controls the southern flank of the Black Sea.

Anyone who has a minimal understanding of military strategies, knows that you cannot wage a conventional ground war without a Navy and an Airforce.

Now, after these recent Pentagon “leaks”, there is ample evidence that Ukraine is running out of ammunition and that they do not have (even with US-NATO support) the military capabilities to confront the Russians.

Hopefully there will be a cease-fire to save lives. I think that the war could end in a month or so and negotiations might begin. But there are obstacles to reaching this objective. There is a crisis in bona fide diplomacy. The Biden administration refuses to enter into dialogue with Russia with a view to reaching a cease-fire and peace negotiations.

In fact, the biggest problem is that politicians in America believe in their own propaganda. They think they can defeat Russia by using  nuclear weapons. Nukes have been re-categorized. Tactical so-called low yield mini-nukes have been slated for use in the conventional war theater. If nukes are used that would lead us into a WW III scenario.

I have researched the history of nuclear weapons, starting with the Manhattan Project (the creation of the American atomic bomb). Many people simply do not know that the Manhattan Project in the immediate wake of Hiroshima, Nagasaki in August 1945 was intended to wage a nuclear war against the USSR, at a time when the Soviet Union and the U.S. were allies.

DV: Are you talking about plans for nuclear war after 1945?

PMC: What I am referring to is the U.S Blueprint of September 15, 1945 according to which the US War Department planned to drop more than 200 atomic bombs on 66 cities of the Soviet Union. This is not mentioned in the history books. See this.

Soviet Cities to be targeted with Atomic Bombs

Map of 66 Soviet Urban Strategic Areas to be Bombed with 206 atomic Bombs (Declassified September 1945)

Moreover, what is also forgotten in our history books is that in January 1918, a multi-national force consisting of troops from the UK, US, Canada and Japan invaded the Soviet Union with 200,000 soldiers, supposedly to “calm down the revolutionaries”, but in fact it was an illegal invasion.

This happened exactly two months after the October Revolution, on January 12, 1918, and it lasted until the early 1920s.

US Occupation Troops in Vladivostock 1918

DV: What are the nuclear capabilities of the U.S’s main rivals today?

PMC: Russia and China are on par with the U.S. with regard to nuclear capabilities. The U.S. has a 1.3 trillion dollar project assigned solely to nuclear weapons, which constitutes Big Money for the US-NATO defense contractors. We are at a dangerous crossroads. Western politicians believe that they can win a nuclear war.

DV: With the war in Ukraine, Nazism has reemerged, now they call it neo-Nazism?

PMC: The U.S. financial establishment have supported the Nazis since the outset of the Third Reich. Wall Street, The Federal Reserve  and the Bank of England supported Adolf Hitler’s election campaign  for Chancellor in the wake of the Weimar Republic. They had business interests in Nazi Germany. There were powerful US economic interests behind the Third Reich including Prescott Bush, the grandfather of George W. Bush.

Moreover, it is common knowledge that you do not go to war if you do not have Oil and Hitler started Operation Barbarossa on June 22, 1941, a military operation for which he needed a huge amount of fuel. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil  of  New Jersey (today’s Exxon) supplied Hitler’s troops until 1945. Without the sale of U.S. oil to Nazi Germany, Operation Barbarossa would not have taken place.

Before Harry Truman became president in 1945, when he was senator he stated his position as follows:

“If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia; and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany”

DV: Today the world is moving towards de-dollarization and the Multipolar world is born.

PMC: I think many analysts and journalists do not understand what de-dollarization means. The dollar as a currency is not the main issue. What is at stake is the macroeconomic apparatus of dollarised countries and their relationship with Wall Street and the Washington consensus.

The Federal Reserve, Wall Street  et al,  generate dollar denominated debts, which then enables them to enforce Neolibaral economic policies Worldwide.

The Central bank of dollarized Third World countries is invariably defunct, controlled by Wall Street, the IMF and the World Bank.

De-dollarization requires “Exit” from the institutions which sustain the (dollar denominated) Debt Crisis. These institutions include the IMF and the WB (which control the central banks of the Global South), not to mention the regional development banks and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

As far as BRICS member states are concerned, India, South Africa and Brazil are heavily dollarized, in the stranglehold of IMF conditionalities. They are not sovereign nation-states. What is required is for sovereign countries to have their own central bank which does not depend on external creditors.

DV: Is Russia considered the bearer of the current de-dollarization?

PMC: In this regard, I should mention the fate of Russia’s gold and dollar deposits in Western banks. They are significant for the Russian government. When Russia’s “Special Military Operation” began in February 2022, about 200 billion dollars of Russia’s Central Bank reserves deposited in Western banks were frozen. And that does not include the billions of dollars of assets of Russia’s “oligarchs” deposited in the Western banking system. Why did they not attempt to withdraw those funds?

DV: Is Russia, from a military standpoint better organized than the USA and NATO.

PMC: The US and European companies which produce weapons for US-NATO, (i.e. the military industrial complex) are entirely in private hands. In practice, the wars waged by US-NATO are privatized, they serve private corporate interests under the label of “national security”.

The “owners of war” are primarily interested in profit and more profit, from the proceeds of weapons sales, rather than the performance of the advanced weapons systems which they sell to US-NATO.

Militarily, Russia is ahead of US-NATO in many regards, specifically with regard to its air defense system (S-400) which is superior to the U.S. Patriot (ADS).

DV: There are many stupid and dangerous things in that war?

PMC: Yes, let’s point to the actions of the so-called International Criminal Court (ICC), which accused President Putin of the war crime of forcibly transferring Ukrainian children to Russia. This is  obvious nonsense. The  ICC did not blame Russia for aggression against a neighboring country, but for removing children from war-torn areas in Donbass, ultimately to save the lives of those children. It’s idiocy and the ICC is totally corrupt.

DV: When talking about the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, what is the relevance of the Davos WEP agenda?

PMC: Russia’s relations with the World Economic Forum are contradictory. Eight months before the February 2022 “Special Military Operation”, Russia participated in a scenario with the WEF on procedures and actions in the event of a major cyber attack.

The “Davos players” are routinely in contact with Russia’s financial establishment. In turn Russia’s financial and banking interests including Russia’s Central Bank have retained their connections with the Washington Consensus as well as with the IMF and the World Bank.

Putin is aware that there are intruders in Russia’s financial system.

DV: What to do when the UN is absolutely blocked?

PMC: It must be known that the UN was at the outset a project which was very much influenced by powerful banking interests including the Rockefellers. I should say that the UN system at the outset of the post war era had international legitimacy and acceptance as an instrument of peace. I have worked for a number of UN agencies as a consultant.

Now the UN is de facto privatized and coopted, partner of the WEF, serving the interests of the financial elites. I would characterize them as “sold out”. They have betrayed the United Nations.

As outlined by the late Padre Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann (who was President of the UN General Assembly in 2008-2009), the UN system needs to be completely restructured with a view to restoring the true spirit of internationalism.

Padre Miguel was my mentor. In this regard, I have worked in Asia, China, Latin America… and I realize just how people from all walks of life in different continents share the same values. Everyone should live in justice and with justice.

DV: How do you view Serbia’s international position?

PMC: Exceptional. Serbia has not caved in to the pressures of Washington, i.e. sanctions on Russia.

DV: Serbia is still being pressured to give up Kosovo and Metohija?

PMC: Based on my experience and from the documents on the international status of Kosovo. I do not think it is possible to negotiate the possibility of Kosovo and Metohija gaining the status of a sovereign nation state.  Kosovo and Metohija belong to Serbia under international law. It is true that there is a US military base there but that is another topic for discussion.

DV: What is another reason why the Republic of Kosovo must not be internationally recognized?

PMC: The leader of the KLA, Hashim Thaci in 1998-99 was wanted by Interpol, for crimes committed in the 1990s. He was used by US-NATO to create a mafia state.

Hashim Thaci and Madeleine  Albright, (1998)

It’s ironic that Thaci is now being held in prison and tried for crimes against humanity committed in the late 1990s. Why didn’t they arrest him in 1999, when they knew everything?

The original source of this article is Serbian National News and Global Research.

The post Neo-Nazism and the War in Ukraine: Interview With Michel Chossudovsky appeared first on LewRockwell.

The Woke Cartel and Twitter’s New CEO

On May 12, 2023, Elon Musk announced that Linda Yaccarino, the now former chairman of global advertising and partnerships at NBCUniversal, would become the new CEO of Twitter. Musk’s appointment of Yaccarino followed an advertiser exodus that caused Twitter’s ad revenue to plummet by more than 60 percent from October 2022 through January 25, 2022, from around $127 million to just over $48 million. According to Pathmatics, by Sensor Tower, more than half of Twitter’s thousand advertisers pulled their ads from Twitter after Musk’s takeover of the social media company.

The flight of advertisers was due to concerns about Twitter’s content moderation and Musk’s so-called free-speech advocacy. In short, Musk’s supposed free-speech absolutism and his subsequent renunciation of the Democratic Party as “the party of division and hate” put Musk and Twitter squarely in the crosshairs of the establishment and its woke cartel. Yaccarino’s appointment represents Musk’s attempt to appease this seemingly all-powerful contingent. But the Yaccarino hire has no doubt damaged Musk’s reputation as a free speech advocate and dashed many hopes for Twitter as an open forum.

Soon after Musk’s announcement, a firestorm erupted on Twitter. Numerous posters claimed that Yaccarino was the executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), a globalist organization that has strongly advocated social media censorship to exclude “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “conspiracy theories.” Through its partnerships with the United Nations and over a thousand leading banks and corporations, the WEF has promoted its Great Reset project to advance “stakeholder capitalism” and “global governance.”.

Of course, Yaccarino is not the executive chairman of the WEF itself—that would be Klaus Schwab, who is the founder and chair—although her LinkedIn profile seems to suggest as much and is the source of the Twitter and alternative media confusion. But as noted by Reuters, Yaccarino is the chairman of the WEF’s Taskforce on the Future of Work and sits on the WEF’s Media, Entertainment and Culture Industry Governors Steering Committee. She declares that she is a “Global Leader” on her LinkedIn profile; however, it is unclear whether she is an alumnus of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders Forum, a training program that Schwab has claimed exerts enormous influence on leading political figures around the world.

Nevertheless, Yaccarino’s affiliation with the WEF should be a cause for concern for those Twitter users who advocate free speech on the platform, as should her statements during an interview with Musk that Twitter advertisers should have a say about Twitter content moderation. In response to Yaccarino’s questioning, Musk stated that Twitter has implemented “adjacency controls” that let marketers block ads from appearing next to “anything that is remotely negative.” That is, posts that include “anything remotely negative” are already subject to visibility filters that limit their reach to reduce their adjacency to ads. That means that Twitter limits the reach of posts that criticize governments, leading politicians, the Federal Reserve, or the globalist organizations with which Yaccarino is associated, for example.

Yaccarino is an establishment-approved figure and is very well respected in woke advertising circles, which is largely why Musk hired her. During her tenure at NBCUniversal, she also served as the chairman of the board of the Ad Council from 2021 to 2022, and she remains on the board of directors to this day. The Ad Council was a driving force in promoting masking, social distancing, and vaccinations throughout the covid crisis. Under Yaccarino’s direction, the Ad Council teamed up with the JED Foundation to produce its “Alone Together” public service announcement (PSA) campaign, which suggested that viewers stay home “alone” to save lives “together.” The PSA was picked up by numerous media outlets and other organizations.

Yaccarino’s WEF and Ad Council affiliations, and her advocacy of advertiser regulation of speech, have led some Twitter users and media outlets to declare that she is a globalist, a vaccine pusher, and another high-profile promoter of censorship. Indeed, it does appear that Musk has caved to the woke cartel and its state, corporate, and international governance enforcers.

The Club Of Rome: How Climate Hysteria Is Being Used To Create Global Governance

In the early 1970s the US and much of the western world was shifting into a stagflationary economic crisis. Nixon removed the dollar completely from the gold standard in 1971 with the aid of the Federal Reserve (or perhaps under the direction of the Fed) which ultimately escalated inflation pressures. Europe’s post war boom came to an abrupt end, while prices on goods (and oil/gasoline) in the US skyrocketed up until 1981-1982, when the Federal Reserve jacked interest rates up to around 20% and created a deliberate recessionary crash.

Interestingly, the IMF had created the SDR system in 1969 just before the gold standard was cut (the same SDR which the IMF is poised to use as the foundation of a global digital currency mechanism).  And, the World Economic Forum was founded in 1971.

The time period is often depicted in films as a happy-go-lucky era of disco, drugs, hippies and rock n’ roll, but the reality is that the early 1970s was the beginning of the end for the west – it was the moment that our economic foundations were sabotaged and the affluence of the middle class was slowly but surely stolen by inflation.

In the midst of this economic “malaise,” which Jimmy Carter later referred to as a “crisis of confidence,” the United Nations and associated globalist round table groups were hard at work developing a scheme to convince the population to embrace global centralization of power. Their goals were rather direct. They wanted:

A rationale for governmental control of human population numbers.

The power to limit industry.

The power to control energy production and dictate energy sources.

The power to control or limit food production and agriculture.

The ability to micromanage individuals lives in the name of some later defined “greater good.”

A socialized society in which the individual right to property is abandoned.

A one-world economic system which they would manage.

A one-world currency system.

A one-world government managing a handful of separate regions.

One of the most revealing quotes on the agenda comes from Clinton Administration Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot, who stated in Time magazine that:

In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority… National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”

To understand how the agenda functions, I offer a quote from globalist Council on Foreign Relations member Richard Gardner in an article in Foreign Affairs Magazine in 1974 titled ‘The Hard Road To World Order’:

In short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great “booming, buzzing confusion,” to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

In other words, the globalists knew that incrementalism would be the only way to achieve a one-world power structure that OPENLY governs, rather than hiding the rule of elitists behind clandestine organizations and puppet politicians. They want a global empire in which they become the anointed “Philosopher Kings” described in Plato’s Republic. Their narcissistic egos cannot help but crave the adoration of the masses they secretly hate.

But even with incrementalism, they know eventually the public will figure out the plan and seek to resist as our freedoms are eroded. Establishing an empire is one thing; keeping it is another. How could the globalists come out of their authoritarian closet, eliminate individual freedoms and rule the world without a rebellion that ultimately destroys them?

The only way such a plan would work is if the people, the peasants in this empire, EMBRACE their own slavery. The public would have to be made to view slavery as a matter of solemn duty and survival, not just for themselves but for the entire species. That way, if anyone rebels they would be seen as a monster by the hive. They would be placing the whole collective in danger by defying the power structure.

Thus, the globalists win. Not just for today, they win forever because there would no longer be anyone left to oppose them.

We got a big taste of this brand of psychological warfare during the pandemic scare, in which all of us were told that a virus with a tiny Infection Fatality Rate of 0.23% was enough to erase a majority of our human rights. Luckily, a large enough group of people stood up and fought back against the mandates and passports. That said, there is a much larger “greater good” agenda at play that the globalists plan to exploit, namely the so-called “climate crisis.”

To be clear, there is ZERO evidence of a climate crisis caused by man-made carbon emissions or “greenhouse” gas emissions. There are no weather events that are out of the ordinary in terms of Earth’s historic climate timeline. There is no evidence to support “tipping point” theories on temperatures. And, the Earth’s temps have risen less than 1°C in 100 years. The official temperature record only goes back to the 1880s, and this narrow timeline is what UN and government funded climate scientists use as a reference point for their claims.

I explain why this is fraudulent science in my article ‘The Gas Stove Scare Is A Fraud Created By Climate Change Authoritarians.’ The point is, the UN has been promoting hysteria over a fake doomsday climate scenario, just like the WEF and WHO promoted hysteria and fear over a non-threat like covid. And, it all began back in the early 1970s with a group tied to the UN called The Club of Rome.

The globalists have been scheming to use environmentalism as an excuse for centralization since at least 1972 when the Club Of Rome published a treatise titled ‘The Limits Of Growth’. Funding a limited study of industry and resources in a joint project with MIT, the findings appeared to be scripted well ahead of time – The end of the planet was nigh unless nations and individuals sacrificed their sovereignty. How convenient for the globalists bankrolling the study…

Twenty years later they would publish a book titled ‘The First Global Revolution.’ In that document they specifically discuss using global warming as a vehicle to form supranational governance:

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

By making humanity’s very existence the great threat, the globalists intended to unify the public around the idea of keeping themselves in check. That is to say, the public would have to sacrifice their freedoms and submit to control in the belief that the human species is too dangerous to be allowed liberty.

The following news special from the Australian Public Broadcasting Service was aired in 1973, not long after the Club Of Rome was founded. It is surprisingly blunt about the purposes of the organization:

What can we derive from this broadcast and its message? The globalists want two specific outcomes most of all – They want the end of national sovereignty and the end of private property through socially incentivised minimalism. The exact same objectives the Club Of Rome outlined in the 1970s are the driving policies of the UN and the World Economic Forum today. The “sharing economy” concept that Klaus Schwab and the WEF often proudly promotes was not thought up by them, it was thought up by the Club Of Rome 50 years ago.

It’s a self fulfilling prophecy: They spend half a century inventing a crisis, drum up public terror, and then offer the very solutions they wanted to enforce decades ago.

In the end, the climate agenda has nothing to do with environmentalism and everything to do with economics. The plan began in the midst of a very real stagflationary crisis, a moment when the middle class populace was most afraid for the future and prices were rising rapidly. This crisis was not caused by the scarcity of resources, it was caused by the mismanagement of the financial system. It’s not a coincidence that the culmination of the global warming scheme is taking place today just as another stagflation disaster is upon us.

The Club of Rome is now a shell of its former glory filled with silly hippies, most likely because the UN and other globalist think-tanks have taken on the role the group used to play. However, the shadow of the original Club is ever present and its strategy of climate fear-mongering is being wielded right now to justify increasing government suppression of energy and agriculture.

If they are not stopped by the public, totalitarian carbon mandates will become the norm. The next generation, living in engineered poverty, will be taught from early childhood that the globalists “saved the world” from a calamity that never really existed. They will be told that the enslavement of humanity is something to be proud of, a gift that keeps the species alive, and anyone who questions that slavery is a selfish villain that wants the destruction of the planet.

Reprinted with permission from

The post The Club Of Rome: How Climate Hysteria Is Being Used To Create Global Governance appeared first on LewRockwell.

Musk, Soros and the End of the Media

So, Elon Musk sure shook things up the other day with his interview on CNBC where he dared to break the Fourth Wall of media when he took a shot at George Soros comparing him to Magneto from Marvel’s X-Men.

It’s a brutally funny exchange as Musk carefully measures his response, takes his time and then goes into full pop culture legend mode invoking Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride.

That CNBC flak wasn’t confused by this, he’s doing his job. He’s enforcing narrative control.

The choice of Magneto is an astute one, since it implies Soros’ childhood activities during World War II.

And while I appreciate Musk stepping on that third rail of media conformity, George Soros the philanthropist, I still maintain he’s closer to Sheev Palpatine than Erik Lehnsherr.

But what Musk really did was to question why media companies should always bow to the whims of their advertisers.

Musk has been subjected to advertiser boycotts since the day he walked in with the sink. Twitter’s business model needs to change. Advertising isn’t it. It’s only a part of it. Musk understands it needs to evolve because Twitter isn’t like legacy media companies.

Not one bit.

WEF Bloodletting

Musk did this after taking real flak from the internet for hiring World Economic Forum member and top-tier advertising executive Linda Vaccarino as the new CEO for Twitter.

Now, Vaccarino is a troubling hire but with Musk positioning himself as Mr. Free Speech in the common square, it may not be as bad as, “See Mother WEFfer, expect evil to follow,” as the initial Twitter outrage mob suggested.

I’ve told you for more than a year (November 2021, to be precise) that we are past Peak Davos, meaning Peak WEF. The WEF is now an easy bogeyman to tar someone with the broadest of guilt-by-association brushes.

The reality, however, is that viewed dispassionately, this year’s World Economic Forum was a mess, a bunch of globalist ghouls and their retinue of sycophants whistling past their own graveyards wondering where the next big score was coming from.

Top Ghoul Wrangler Soros himself didn’t even show up, preferring instead to suck the blood of the attendees of this year’s Munich Security Conference to ensure the trains to World War III would run on time.

Clubs like the WEF are only as strong as the talent they can keep. Is Vaccarino evidence of brain drain from the WEF? It’s not ludicrous. In fact, it’s more likely than she’s some wide-eyed ideologue.

I’m not saying it’s true, I’m saying it’s possible. So, distrust, but verify is your guide here.

The incentives line up nicely.

Musk needs to shore up Twitter’s relationships with advertisers to keep Twitter afloat.

Vaccarino brings instant credibility to the company.

If Musk is thinking in terms of a different kind of ad model, Vaccarino’s hire makes sense.

Talk to the Hand

The corporate orthodoxy imposed on media companies comes not just from retards like Reed Hastings at Netflix but also through the corruption of their boards by Davos generals like Blackrock and Vanguard.

Their real profit comes from exercising power. Sacrificing a quarter or two of profitability to put the vein tap in deep across the C-Suites of the S&P 500 and EuroStoxx 50 is hard to quantify on the balance sheet.

But Musk can say what he wants in public because that itself is a form of advertising for Twitter and/or Tesla that can’t be yanked by some ninny like Larry Fink or Alex Soros making a phone call.

He’s on their level and the company is private.

When your business model depends on advertising you’re their bitch. Musk knows this so you make the calculated move to attack Soros, becoming a hero to a vast audience spurned by Twitter when Soros, Fink and the rest of the WEF ran the place

One of the first blogs I wrote here in 2016 was called “The Authenticity Gap.” In handicapping that election correctly, that Trump would win, I made the point that despite his obvious deficits, he was far more authentic than Hillary.

Being comfortable being yourself is what drove Trump’s victory. The country was desperate for it and the swing voters were Millennials.

Well, guess what? Musk is shoring up his AQ – Authenticity Quotient – with not only his Millennial fanbois who buy Teslas, but even jaded Gen-X curmudgeons like me, even if I still spend most of my day in Distrust, But Verify mode.

Pied Piper or not, he has the platform to drive the conversation where it was never allowed to go before. We can take it from here, folks.

No, I Said, “Tucker!”

And this brings me to Tucker Carlson, who announced to great fanfare that he’s bringing his erstwhile news show to Twitter, self-produced.

His two short videos since Fox canceled his show, putting him in contract limbo, have generated ratings that even his record cable ratings couldn’t match.

Advertiser boycotts hit Fox multiple times over things Carlson said on air. They don’t want the media to speak the truth, they want it, as Carlson pointed out in his last video, to tell you only the part of the truth that supports their agenda.

Musk has been subject to this since the day he walked into Twitter with a kitchen sink in his hand.

Every globalist tit-sucker and wannabe-brownshirt, but I repeat myself, threatened Musk with extinction. The EU threatened to ban Twitter. The Biden administration began official investigations.

It was all so breathlessly repeated in the compliant media one would have thought going long smelling salts would have been good investment advice for every case of the fucking vapors these people had.

Think back to the so-called “Discord Leaks” and the ruinous press conference with Dept. of Defense Spokesman John Kirby. We had ‘reporters’ openly asking how they could help the DoD suppress information about the war in Ukraine.

As I argued in my blog about this issue, the media was openly simping for the regime, torching what remained of its credibility to announce to the world they have joined that team against us.

Neither the content of these leaks nor the media’s response was revelatory to anyone with a passing acquaintance with the current state of politics. No, the noteworthy thing was that they were so willing to take off the mask so we could all stop pretending they were journalists.

When the media openly asks how they can help … we have crossed into new territory. Why?

Because it’s never been that way before. Yes, we knew the media were court stenographers, people like myself and Kit {Knightly at Off Guardian} have known this for more than a decade. But to openly torch what’s left of their credibility to support disinformation to keep the administration’s secrets is something very very new.

This wasn’t some double-secret 12-D chess maneuver by hyper-competent game players. This was far more what it looked like on the surface, a sphincter-clenching moment of raw panic from people whose lies were outed in pure damage control mode.

So, about that power of the advertisers, again? How do they have any when their platforms and networks have zero credibility?

Who does the CNBC flak dumbstruck by Musk’s Inigo Montoya impression thinks is really in charge here?

And Then the Lights Came On…

It was like that moment in the Pixar classic, UP, where Doug becomes Alpha:

The media is so used to bullying people into submission they don’t know what to do when it doesn’t work. But, why would you do that? Lose Money? It’s unthinkable.

Take a step back and see the reversal here. Do you really think Musk is scared of these quislings when I own the single biggest, and by far, most powerful communications platform in history?

The answer would be no.

And that reason is simple. Musk’s real heresy wasn’t returning something closer to free speech to Twitter. It was proving that the company could operate on 20% of its old budget and one-quarter of its staff.

That 80% cost reduction didn’t just equate to stabilizing the company, it freed it from the tyranny of the advertiser.

Musk doesn’t need advertising on Twitter the way Twitter needed advertising before him. The company wasn’t being run as a profit center measured in dollars.

Twitter was a loss leader for tyrants. The legacy media conglomerates are their policy makers and the ad executives their thought policemen.

Carlson can now self-produce a loss-leader for free speech while his lawyers roast Fox’s chesnuts and he, Musk and Trump can:

… build another Mar-a-Lago in their heads living TV-ad free for months with “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?” the only choice on the in-house cable feed.


Musk is now turning the entire cost structure of news media on its head. It was always going to happen, he just ripped the last band-aid off exposing the rot underneath.

The media companies and their advertising control model worked so well for so long because it costs billions to run a broadcast network. The on-air talent, the producers, the studio, cameras, travel, etc. are expensive folks. FOX’s makeup budget alone is more than my annual operating costs.

No wonder they just fired Laura Ingraham, too.

Have you seen the 25-54 demo ratings?

The media companies had to depend on the kindness of strangers to even stay in business.

Today most of the distribution has been decentralized, i.e. Twitter and personal ISP fees. Physical production tools are cheap. Bandwidth is cheaper. The overhead of running a small broadcast company with a private subscription model is a far lower percentage of top-line revenue than any big network.

The legacy media can neither buy your loyalty nor coerce your conformity.

Now shit-posters cum ‘investigative journalists‘ like Brian Krassenstein whose tone deaf defense of Soros is what prompted all of this have to work that much harder to protect him.

And thanks to Twitter and things like it, the world is your research department. Now, the best voices, the best talent, spend their time curating what they see. More time for enjoying life, less time wasted sucking up to Sith Lords.

That was Tucker Carlson’s real power when he was at Fox. He’s now free of all of those constraints.

If you want to see where Carlson is headed once he’s doing a free show on Twitter, just look to Megyn Kelly.

That’s where the editorial bias is now, not in the corporate boardrooms.

You are the ultimate arbiter of what you deem valid. Your eyeballs are all that matters. Your consent.

These are only some of the reasons why Musk owns the most powerful media company in the world.

Does he need to pay Tucker Carlson $20+ million to be on his network? No. Carlson pays Musk.

Does Musk need to hire Carlson a production team? No.

A research team? No.

A legal team to fact check everything? No.

The reason why Musk can’t be bought is because Musk doesn’t need the advertisers.

The advertisers need Musk.

Musk knows it. Carlson knows it. The paid influencers know it. Soros knows it.

What Twitter now does, if its algorithm is set to neutrality, is assist everyone in finding whatever audience they want to attract. The media companies can’t maintain the purity of the signal or enforce the groupthink, because they don’t own the means of production anymore.

All they can do is flood the zone with low quality bots.

And the thing that scares them more than anything else is the day when Musk rolls out the real revenue maker for Twitter. The one where they can’t bribe us with money or power because neither of those things buys dignity.

Reprinted with permission from Gold Goats ‘n Guns.

The post Musk, Soros and the End of the Media appeared first on LewRockwell.