Category Archives: Tyranny

Pro-Censorship Democrats Whitewash the Federal Government’s Iron Fist, by Jim Bovard

It’s not censorship, it’s proactive speech monitoring and enhancement. From Jim Bovard at libertarianinstitute.org:

The House Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government held a hearing last Thursday on the Twitter Files. Elon Musk purchased Twitter last October and was aghast to learn how the feds had previously domineered his new company. “Twitter is both a social media company and a crime scene,” he tweeted on December 10. Musk chose a handful of journalists to go through Twitter’s records and expose how the feds domineered the company.

Prior to Thursday’s hearing, the Twitter Files revealed that the U.S. State Department had directly pressured Twitter to cancel almost 300,000 accounts (including those of journalists and foreign diplomats). In June 2021, a State Department contractor sent Twitter a list of “around 40k Twitter accounts that our researchers suspect are engaging in inauthentic behavior…and Hindu nationalism more broadly.” But the list was full of hapless Americans with no ties to India or its politics. The State Department sent Twitter a list of 5,500 names believed to be “Chinese…accounts” engaged in “state-backed coordinated manipulation.” The list was so sloppy that it “included multiple Western government accounts and at least three CNN employees based abroad,” according to a Twitter internal analysis. One Twitter executive ridiculed the presumption that “If you retweet a news source linked to Russia, you become Russia-linked.”

The FBI perpetually browbeat Twitter to suppress accounts, including Twitter parody accounts that only idiots or federal agents would not recognize as humor. Taibbi wrote, “The master-canine quality of the FBI’s relationship to Twitter comes through in this November 2022 email, in which ‘FBI San Francisco is notifying you’ it wants action on four accounts.” In a March 2022 meeting with top Twitter executives, FBI agent Laura Dehmlow “warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government.” Dehmlow had a task force of 80 agents to curb “subversive data utilized to drive a wedge between the populace and the government.” Her team continually pounded Twitter headquarters with tweets and individuals they wanted suppressed.

Continue reading

The SVB Collapse: How Financial Crisis Boosts The CBDC ‘Threat’, by Kit Knightly

Imagine tyranny that will make Covid totalitarianism look innocuous. From Kit Knightly at off-guardian.org:

Last Friday saw the total failure of the Silicon Valley Bank, the 16th biggest bank in the United States. The biggest bank failure since the 2008 financial crisis

By Sunday, the Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank had joined SVB in full collapse. All three are now safely under Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) control.

The FDIC has taken the unusual step of fully guaranteeing all deposits kept with the SVB – meaning the federal government will give taxpayer money out to compensate every SVB customer.

But the damage didn’t stop there. Naturally, this put pressure on other regional banks, with two more – First Republic Bank and PacWest Bank – coming close to collapsing themselves, following mini-runs.

The weekend saw Wall Street’s 4 biggest banks lose over 55 billion dollars in value. Bank stocks around the world are sliding in value.

As of this morning Credit Suisse’s stock is at an all-time low, sparking a sell-off of stocks all over the world.

In short, the financial situation is teetering on the edge of a major crisis. But is it accidental? And if not, what is the agenda behind it?

Well, firstly, no it’s not accidental. Let’s get that out of the way.

Does that mean the collapses were planned and engineered to the last detail? Maybe, maybe not.

Certainly, there was at least some warning for people in the know.

SVB’s CEO and CFO dumped a combined 4 million dollars of stock in the two weeks before the crash, and Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund withdrew all their funds from SVB the Thursday before the collapse.

That is despite the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation finding that SVB was a “sound financial institution” as late as March 9th, and that it only entered insolvency after investors caused a run.

Continue reading

Geofence Surveillance: First, They Spied on Protesters. Then Churches. You’re Next, by John and Nisha Whitehead

Most of all, they want to know where you are. It makes it easier to accuse you of something. From John and Nisha Whitehead at rutherford.org:

“I know the capability that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”—Senator Frank Church on Meet The Press, 1975

If you give the government an inch, it will always take a mile.

This is how the slippery slope to all-out persecution starts.

Martin Niemöller’s warning about the widening net that ensnares us all, a warning issued in response to the threat posed by Nazi Germany’s fascist regime, still applies.

“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

This particular slippery slope has to do with the government’s use of geofence technology, which uses cell phone location data to identify people who are in a particular area at any given time.

First, police began using geofence warrants to carry out dragnet sweeps of individuals near a crime scene.

Then the FBI used geofence warrants to identify individuals who were in the vicinity of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

It wasn’t long before government officials in California used cell phone and geofence data to track the number and movements of churchgoers on church grounds during the COVID-19 lockdowns.

If we’ve already reached the point where people praying and gathering on church grounds merits this level of government scrutiny and sanctions, we’re not too far from free-falling into a total surveillance state.

Continue reading

On ‘Prisoners of Conscience’ Who Fell Through the Cracks of EU Values, by Stephen Karganovic

The EU is just as hypocritical as the U.S. and Great Britain when it comes to freedom of the press. From Stephen Karganovic at strategic-culture.org:

A Spanish journalist has been rotting in a Polish prison for the past year. And nobody knew or cared, Stephen Karganovic writes.

Those who watched Duran associate Alex Christoforou’s podcast the other day [at 18 to 19:45 minutes] must have been as taken aback as I was by Alex’s revelation of the unsavoury fate of Spanish journalist Pablo Gonzales in European “values” stronghold Poland.

Gonzales, a Spanish (another “EU values” country) citizen, it turns out has been rotting in a Polish prison for the past year. Not a week, not a month or even a couple of months, but for just over a year. And nobody knew or cared. He is not being detained on any specific charges to which he could mount a legal defence. He is listed simply as “under investigation” for the somewhat vague offence of being an agent of Russia. If that is what indeed he is, so far it seems no judicially cognisable evidence to support such an allegation has been produced by the Polish authorities. After just over a year that Gonzales has been kept in prison, the Polish “investigation” has failed to turn up any incriminating facts that might form the basis for even a flimsy indictment. As a result, no charges have been filed and no trial is in prospect for Gonzales. As trite as that may sound, it is also disturbingly accurate: in the Europe that, with its gallant overseas allies, fights for democracy in Ukraine, European journalist Pablo Gonzales is languishing in a Kafkaesque predicament.

In his expose, Alex Christoforou asks the natural question, “Where is the Spanish government in all this?” [at 19:20 minutes]. The answer is bound to disillusion everyone who imagined that in situations such as this morality had any influence over political decisions. It all comes down to the odious principle of raison d’état. Spain has issues with Catalan and Basque troublemakers and is loath to create a precedent that would provide foreigners a pretext to meddle in the way it treats its prisoners. For Spain the convenient solution therefore is to downplay the incarceration in Poland of one of its own citizens and hope that no one will notice.

Continue reading

“One Health”, ESG & “Sustainable Development”: Inside the WHO’s “Pandemic Treaty”, by Simon Elmer

An excellent survey of what the globalists are trying to do with world health. From Simon Elmer at off-guardian.org:

The World Health Organization is the One Ring to Rule them All, and its written goal, inscribed in fiery letters along both sides of its band, is the Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response Treaty. Fashioned by the Dark Lord of the Twenty-first Century, the United States of America, in its own iteration of Mount Doom, it only appears to yield US sovereignty to an external organisation.

In reality and practice, as this article will show, the Treaty will give Washington increased power over the G20 nations — the holders of the other ‘rings’ — and through them the rest of the Western World: not only its people but also its animals, its eco-systems, its resources. This, and not the health of the globe, is its dark purpose.

The Civil War

The World Health Organization, which since January 2020 has received $782 million in grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is a corporate-funded and lobbied agency of the United Nations without legal jurisdiction over the populations of its 194 member states — to which it acts, at least in principle, in an advisory role.

But that’s going to change soon.

On 3 March 2022, as lockdown regulations were revoked across Europe and NATO declared its proxy war on Russia, the European Council adopted a decision to authorise the opening of negotiations for an international Treaty on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response. Under the terms of this Treaty, the member-states of the World Health Organization will be legally bound to implement restrictions on human rights and freedoms — such as further lockdowns, mandatory face masking, compulsory gene therapy, a system of digital identity and programmes of surveillance and censorship — all on the judgement of the WHO.

Continue reading

Post-Decency Politics: House Democrats Use Hearing to Attack Both Free Speech and a Free Press, by Jonathan Turley

When you got nothing else, you go ad hominem. From Jonathan Turley at jonathanturley.org:

Below is my column in The Hill on continued scorched earth tactics of Democrats in attacking any witnesses raising free speech concerns over government censorship.

Here is the column:

“At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” Those words were first asked by lawyer Joseph Welch in his confrontation with Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) during the Senate’s infamous Army-McCarthy hearings. This week, nearly 70 years later, Welch’s words seem more relevant than ever after House Democrats savaged two journalists who attempted to explain a government effort to censor citizens.

It was only the latest of a series of hearings in which FBI agents and other whistleblowers, experts and journalists have been personally attacked for raising free-speech concerns. Last week’s hearing showed definitively that we live in a post-decency era.

The latest attacks came as journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger testified about breaking the “Twitter Files” story, detailing how the FBI and other agencies secretly sought to censor or ban citizens from social media. In her opening statement, Delegate Stacey Plaskett (D-Virgin Islands), the ranking member of the House Judiciary subcommittee, attacked them as “so-called journalists” and said they were “a direct threat” to the safety of others by reporting the censorship story.

Taibbi pushed back, saying that “I’m not a ‘so-called’ journalist” and giving a brief description of his award-winning career at Rolling Stone magazine and other publications. Yet other committee members also attacked the honesty of the two journalists. And after failed efforts to claim they were Elon Musk’s corrupt “scribes,” or limited by him in their investigations, the committee members attacked their ethics.

Continue reading

The Forced Medication of All Citizens, by Karen Hunt

How long before we’re forced to take drugs and vaccines? From Karen Hunt at off-guardian.org:

…most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution.”
Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

It all started back in the 1950s with “these drugs will make you feel better, just try them.” And people did.

Over the years it morphed into “WE RECOMMEND these drugs if you don’t want to be sick, depressed or dead.” Almost everyone listened and accepted that drugs were the answer and there was no way to live without them.

Over the past three years it’s been “YOU MUST TAKE these drugs or else you endanger your own life and the lives of those around you.” By this point, people were so conditioned to take drugs that they thought nothing of submitting to an experimental mRNA gene therapy that the experts promised would keep them “safe”.

Within the next couple of years, it will be “YOU ARE REQUIRED to take these drugs by law and if you don’t, you will go to prison for endangering the planet.” Having been consistently brainwashed for all these years, most people will unquestioningly comply. Those who don’t, will be informed on by neighbors, coworkers, even their own family members, for the safety of the planet.

Continue reading

New WHO Amendments Creating A Global Regime In The Name Of Health, by Dr. Sean Lin and Jacky Guan

After the stunning failures of the global Covid regime, it only makes sense to make WHO the powers of a global medical dictatorship. from Dr. Sean Lin and Jacky Guan at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:

Since its establishment, the World Health Organization (WHO) has assumed the role of an advisory entity in the international health domain. Since 2005, the WHO established International Health Regulations (IHR) as the main compliance tool to ensure that public health emergencies would be handled swiftly. The COVID pandemic perfectly illustrates how powerful the WHO already is.

However, a new set of amendments (pdf) proposed by state members of the WHO was published at the end of 2022, seeking to enhance the WHO’s power under the guise of the IHR. This, in addition to a newly proposed Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) (pdf) and the addition of a pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response (WHO CA+) clause (pdf) in the INB, raises several red flags on the paradigm shift the WHO is undertaking, from playing the role of an international health advisory body to becoming a global regime acting in the name of health.

From Patient-Doctor Relationship to Powerful Health Conglomerate

Throughout history, people have relied on connections with friends, family, and neighbors to maintain a healthy social life. This is important not only for wellness but also for building the trust upon which the foundation of relationships lies. Just as it is vital in relationships with family and friends, in regard to health, trust is vital in patient-doctor relationships.

Doctors across many countries and diverse regions have a plethora of different methods to treat something as simple as a cold. Some may give you a flu shot, some may prescribe you some minor medication, and some might even tell you to drink hot soup and get lots of rest. There may also be an unfamiliar remedy from Latin America or Southeast Asia that works just as well as something you could pick up in a U.S. pharmacy. This is all to say that well-trained doctors know what they’re doing given the methods available to them.

The one-on-one patient-doctor relationship has traditionally been the tried-and-true way to establish a health system in any society. Even under evidence-based medicine, advice from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or other health agencies serves as nonbinding recommendations to doctors that give them the right to make their own decisions based on their knowledge of the patient.

Continue reading

On This “Need” Business, by Eric Peters

What collectivists need the most is your money. Who collects under collectivism? From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

Collectivists often say there is a “need” for something – and that coercion (i.e., government) must provide it.

As in the “need” for  . . . insert here.

What’s interesting about this, beyond the often unnoticed fact that collectivism is really a kind of deformed individualism in that every “collective” is necessarily run by individuals (Stalin, for instance) who coerce the collective, is what’s admitted to by collectivists – without irony or understanding. That being if there is, in fact, a need for something, there is incentive (money to be made, profit) to provide it, arising from from the willingness of those who feel the need for that something to pay for it.

Put another way: If there is no incentive to provide it – because people aren’t willing to pay for it – it is persuasive evidence people aren’t especially interested in it.

In other words, people – as individuals – don’t really need it.

What coercive collectivists really mean is that they, the collectivists, want whatever it is.

Continue reading

The Brain Standard, Part Two, by Robert Gore

Three steps forward, two steps back; so humanity advances.

Part One

Ideas are the foundation of the brain standard, one of which is that only individuals have rights. This cuts through the collectivist dreck that passes for thought among most of the world’s so-called intellectuals. The variations of collectivism all disguise nothing more than brute force hiding behind propaganda. Their inevitable failures stem from their essential flaw: those that control the collective claim rights that negate those of the individual.

There are grounds for hope. From the ruins of impending collapse there will be some who reject collectivism and are committed to rebuilding on a foundation of individual rights. How they will protect those rights and whatever territories they stake out are what theoretical physicists sometimes call “engineering problems.” One advantage they’ll have, though, as the brain standard constituency—they’ll be smarter than their adversaries. Attention, imagination, and intelligence will be keenly focused on building from the ruins and protecting what they’ve built.

Here’s a thought experiment. Imagine someone invents a cheap, portable device that defends its bearer and his or her property from all violence from all sources, but has no offensive capability. The device is so cheap that virtually everyone can buy it, and charities are set up to donate it to those who can’t. The device is universally available and creates a world without violence.

How would such a world function? People would have to produce to survive, but absent mutual agreement no one would have an enforceable claim on anyone else’s production. There would be no coercive transfers of money or property. Disputes would be settled by negotiation and mediation. A body of civil law similar to English common law would develop. Surely such a society would figure out a way to deal with nonviolent crime.

The negation of violence would eliminate government’s nominal rationale: protecting citizens from violence. In the absence of government (and its violence), individuals and society as a whole would be free to advance as far as their capabilities will take them.

This extreme hypothetical offers a stark contrast with the absence of anything resembling freedom anywhere in the world today. Government and collectivism are top-down codependents based on violence and coercion. Their current manifestations are replaying the dreary and what should be the common knowledge lesson of history: they inevitably fail, often after a great deal of bloodshed.

******

SLL has a unique take on the world. Some like its perspective, some don’t. If you like it, or if you don’t but take a perverse joy in funding your intellectual adversaries, please consider offering compensation for the time and effort put into SLL. Most of our readers are value-for-value people. If that describes you, please recognize SLL’s value. The payment links are on the right or click the button below. Thank you.

******

In the current jockeying among collectivist governments for the things over which they jockey, Russia’s and China’s are doing a better job than the U.S.’s. The former are the co-leaders of the Eurasian alliance and represent substantial politic and economic power. The latter is bankrupt, embroiled in yet another war it won’t win, and stands accused of sabotaging its most important European ally’s oil pipelines. At home, the U.S. government and its fellow travelers are in thrall to brain-dead ideologies that hasten the country’s disintegration.

Continue reading