The purpose behind this Ministry of Truth is to keep a lid on the spread of information online. All information must first pass through the censorship filters established by the BBC and the UK establishment before it reaches your eyes and ears.
Further up the food chain in this decision-making process are the United Nations and the World Economic Forum (WEF), two heads of the snake, so to speak, that govern world affairs
In response to the circulation of what it described as an overwhelming amount of “misinformation” and “fake news,” the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in partnership with the British government established a “Ministry of Truth” in 2019, just prior to the launch of the covid scamdemic.
Right on schedule, the BBC and the government of the United Kingdom created a censorship operation called “The Trusted News Initiative,” or TNI, that includes as partners the following organizations:
• The Associated Press (AP) • AFP • First Draft • Google / YouTube • Twitter • Reuters • Financial Times • Meta (Facebook) • European Broadcasting Union • CBC / Radio-Canada • The Hindu • Microsoft • The Washington Post
This is not an exhaustive list, mind you – many other mainstream and corporate-controlled “news” outlets and tech platforms are still to this very day participating in rampant censorship of certain topics and ideas.
The purpose behind this Ministry of Truth is to keep a lid on the spread of information online. All information must first pass through the censorship filters established by the BBC and the UK establishment before it reaches your eyes and ears.
Further up the food chain in this decision-making process is the United Nations and the World Economic Forum (WEF), two heads of the snake, so to speak, that govern world affairs.
“The standards focused on areas such as fact-checking, transparency, and impartiality, and news organizations found to be publishing information NOT approved by powerful Governments and other powerful institutions faced severe consequences,” reports The Exposé.
Millions of people are dead because of Ministry of Truth censorship
Not just news outlets but also people were swept up in the Ministry of Truth’s censorship scheme. In order to have a voice in the conversation, scientists and other experts have had to kowtow to the “authorities” and what they deem as “true,” or else face censorship.
Those who resist face loss of livelihood, harassment and intimidation, and in some cases loss of life. Many lives, in fact, have been lost as a direct result of the Ministry of Truth’s operations. (Related: Science shows that covid lockdowns caused thousands of excess deaths.)
“Scientists and experts were effectively silenced, with any research or findings that didn’t align with the Government’s narrative on Covid-19 being dismissed as “fake news,’” reports indicate.
“It also led to a society where people were afraid to speak out, where Governments had too much control over what people could know and think, and where free speech and independent thinking were stifled.”
“The public was fed only information that the Ministry deemed to be ‘true,’ but this often meant that important and potentially life-saving information was withheld … This led to the tragic and unnecessary loss of millions of lives due to the Covid-19 injections.”
In the United States alone in 2021, nearly 700,000 excess deaths occurred that were caused by Ministry of Truth censorship. By Nov. 11, 2022, that figure had ballooned to 1.06 million excess deaths.
In Europe in 2021, the excess death count was 382,000, which ballooned more than 600,000 excess deaths by November 2022 – excluding Ukraine.
In Australia, there were only 1,303 excess deaths in 2020 before covid “vaccines” were unleashed through Operation Warp Speed. In 2021, that figure increased by 747 percent to reach 11,042 excess deaths.
“By the end of July 2022, there were 18,973 excess deaths in Australia, representing a 1,356% increase from 2020,” The Exposé explains. “This is more excess deaths in 7 months than in the previous two years combined.”
All in all, there have been more than 1.8 million excess deaths since the rollout of covid injections that are linked either to the injections themselves or to some other form of covid tyranny that the Ministry of Truth misled people into believing would “cure” the plandemic. That is a whole lot of blood on the hands of the censorship establishment.
“I believed that the authorities responded to the largest public health crisis of our lives with compassion, diligence, and scientific expertise,” Bass writes. “I was wrong. We in the scientific community were wrong. And it cost lives.”
“I can see now that the scientific community from the CDC to the WHO to the FDA and their representatives, repeatedly overstated the evidence and misled the public about its own views and policies, including on natural vs. artificial immunity, school closures and disease transmission, aerosol spread, mask mandates, and vaccine effectiveness and safety, especially among the young. All of these were scientific mistakes at the time, not in hindsight. Amazingly, some of these obfuscations continue to the present day.”
A seventh-year student at a medical school in Texas penned an op-ed for Newsweek this week calling out the establishment for imposing lockdowns, masks, “vaccines” and booster shots, and other unscientific, life-destroying tyranny in the name of fighting covid.
Kevin Bass, a medical student and researcher, says he initially supported the government’s covid fascism. He believed it was the right thing to do in order to save lives, but now believes the exact opposite.
“I believed that the authorities responded to the largest public health crisis of our lives with compassion, diligence, and scientific expertise,” Bass writes. “I was wrong. We in the scientific community were wrong. And it cost lives.”
“I can see now that the scientific community from the CDC to the WHO to the FDA and their representatives, repeatedly overstated the evidence and misled the public about its own views and policies, including on natural vs. artificial immunity, school closures and disease transmission, aerosol spread, mask mandates, and vaccine effectiveness and safety, especially among the young. All of these were scientific mistakes at the time, not in hindsight. Amazingly, some of these obfuscations continue to the present day.”
Are the powers that be now openly admitting they were wrong to try to avoid paying the price for their crimes against humanity?
For whatever reason, Bass just believed everything that Tony Fauci and other authorities were declaring at the time as solutions to the covid virus, which to this day, just to clarify, has still never been isolated and proven to exist.
Now, though, Bass admits that the entire approach the scientific community took to address covid was “inherently flawed … and continues to be.” And these inherent flaws, he says, resulted “in thousands if not millions of preventable deaths.”
“What we did not properly appreciate is that preferences determine how scientific expertise is used, and that our preferences might be – indeed, our preferences were – very different from many of the people that we serve,” he explains.
“We created policy based on our preferences, then justified it using data. And then we portrayed those opposing our efforts as misguided, ignorant, selfish, and evil.”
Why this sudden change in belief? It could be because the entire world is waking up to the fact that the “vaccines” are a sham – and a deadly one, at that. Hundreds of millions of Americans let themselves get jabbed based on the inherently flawed consensus of the scientific community, of which Bass is a part.
These people’s inherently flawed beliefs at the start of the scamdemic destroyed so many lives that people are now demanding that heads roll. So, in an attempt to save themselves from the fallow, the Kevin Basses of the world are finally relenting to the fact that they were wrong in the hopes that the court of public opinion will deliver a non-guilty verdict and let their crimes against humanity slide.
Bass’s op-ed is shockingly admissive, and the fact that Newsweek even published it at all is telling. The narrative is shifting to where everyone, regardless of what “side” they are on, is reaching a common understanding that what happened during covid can never be allowed to happen again.
“My motivation for writing this is simple: It’s clear to me that for public trust to be restored in science, scientists should publicly discuss what went right and what went wrong during the pandemic, and where we could have done better,” Bass concludes.
“It’s OK to be wrong and admit where one was wrong and what one learned. That’s a central part of the way science works. Yet I fear that many are too entrenched in groupthink – and too afraid to publicly take responsibility – to do this.”
More covid-related news can be found at Plague.info.
CRIMINAL CHARGES: Top U.S. Cardiologist calls for the Bill Gates Foundation, World Economic Forum, World Health Organization, U.S. Government, Pharmaceutical Suppliers and others to be charged with illegal advertising, fraud and mass negligent homicide. pic.twitter.com/kS69T3wSAI
Research conducted by New York University’s Center for Social Media and Politics into Russian trolling behavior on Twitter in the lead-up to the 2016 US presidential election has found “no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.”
Which is to say that all the years of hysterical shrieking about Russian trolls interfering in US democracy and corrupting the fragile little minds of Americans — a narrative that has been used to drum up support for internet censorship and ever-increasing US government involvement in the regulation of online speech — was false.
The most important reporting a journalist can do in the western world today is to help expose the lies, propaganda and malpractice of other western journalists and news outlets. But that is also the last thing a western journalist is ever likely to do because western journalists seek praise and approval not from the public, but from other western journalists…
You can see this in the way they post on Twitter, with their little in-jokes and insider references, how they’re always cliquing up and beckoning and signalling to each other. Twitter is a great window through which to observe western journalists because they really lay it all out there. Watch their bootlicking facilitation of status quo power, their ingratiating tail-wagging with each other, the way they gang up on dissenters like zealots burning a heretic. To see what I’m talking about you have to pay attention not to their viral tweets that go off but to all the rest that receive little attention because the ones that take off are the ones the public is interested in. If you watch them carefully it becomes clear that for most of them the intended audience of the majority of their posts is not the rank-and-file public, but their fellow members of the media class.
Western Journalists Are Cowardly, Approval-Seeking Losers
"The western media class is a cloistered, incestuous circle jerk that only cares about impressing other members of the cloistered, incestuous circle jerk."https://t.co/lB9CvU0xrM
In another case of yesterday’s conspiracy theory becoming today’s fact, mainstream media is finally reporting on what we have known all along. Biden, Fauci and Gates have been sharing misinformation with us. There was no “winter of severe illness and death” for the unvaccinated.
In reality, this is a pandemic of the vaccinated.
Official investigations are being launched and lawsuits are being readied. But before we get to that, let’s take a look at an incredible phenomenon occurring closer to home. In the US, mainstream media outlets are beginning to quietly and tentatively report on the truth.
‘This mass delusion that we are all under through unrelenting propaganda & censorship they are censoring all these things. If I have to read one more article of a young person dying where the word vaccine isn't even mentioned as a possibility it's disgusting’ ~ Dr Pierre Kory pic.twitter.com/Wfd778LASd
Notorious globalist billionaire George Soros has gone on the record declaring himself a Godand promising an audience at the World Economic Forum that the New World Order are making the necessary preparations to completely and utterly obliterate the conservative agenda in the US.
Soros is playing his part in this destructive agenda the only way he knows how — by throwing his dirty money around, sponsoring hate groups, paid protestors, and NGOs, attempting to subvert the course of democracy and eradicate the silent majority.
Soros has also been paying dozens of “journalists” and other corporate media figures large sums of cash to promote his radical agenda — and now we know their names.
In return for their souls, Soros is paying these so-called “journalists” anywhere from $63,000 to $85,000 to promote his agenda to the masses and publish glowing reports on his radical leftist activities.
Much of the propaganda effort has sought to advance Soros’ progressive criminal justice reform.
Via his non-profit the Open Society Foundations (OSF), Soros is pumping cash to the media in the form of fellowships, or “Soros Justice Fellowships.”
To receive big payouts, fellows must produce projects that align with Soros’ goals to restructure the U.S. justice system with soft-on-crime policies that favor criminals.
Among the goals is reducing incarceration rates and introducing radical sentencing guidelines.
However, the eligibility for these fellowships is not just limited to journalists. OSF offers three distinct categories of fellowship funding — advocacy, media, and youth activism.
According to scholarship data provided to universities, OSF may pay up to six figures for fellowships. These categories qualify a wide variety of professions such as lawyers, advocates, grassroots organizers, artists, and filmmakers.
Soros Justice Fellowship alums have been at the center of several controversies in recent years due to their activism.
Susan Burton, founder of the criminal justice reform activist group A New Way of Life (ANWOL), and Mark-Anthony Johnson, a longtime ally of Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors, have both made headlines for the radical activism after taking Soros’ cash.
The fellowship program isn’t new, however, and Soros has offered this funding for over 25 years. A total of 469 individuals have received Soros-funded fellowships since the program’s inception.
Most of the earliest fellows involved in journalism went on to become acclaimed reporters across a variety of corporate media outlets.
Below is a full list of Big Media operatives who have received funding from George Soros to promote his radical agenda.
The following are current fellows involved in mainstream media, out of 18 total fellows for 2022:
Yasmine Arrington, of Washington, D.C., will produce a podcast featuring only “Black and brown youth voices” discussing the criminal justice system, including juvenile probation, reentry, and recidivism. Arrington has written for TeenVogue, Essence, Black Enterprise, Forbes Magazine, Washington Post, and Baltimore Times.
Zachary Siegel, of Chicago, Illinois, will write and narrate news coverage concerning current approaches to overdose deaths. Siegel has written for Harper’s Magazine, New York Times Magazine, The Atlantic, The Nation, New Republic, WIRED, Politico, and Scientific American.
Irene Franco Rubio, a Phoenix, Arizona, native attending the University of Southern California, will produce a podcast on juvenile minority incarceration and their criminalization in public school systems. Franco Rubio has written for Forbes, USA Today, Teen Vogue, and NPR, as well as worked for Michelle Obama’s nonprofit. Franco Rubio was recognized as a scholar by a number of prominent groups: Facebook Journalism Project, Marguerite Casey Foundation’s Equal Voice News, International Center for Journalists, and ProPublica Diversity.
Several current fellowships went to budding journalist-activists:
Tiera Howleit, a student reporter at Indiana University’s collegiate paper. Howleit’s fellowship profile says that she will use the funds to “elevate the voices of people of color […] impacted by the criminal justice system.” Howleit founded “Black Collegians” in 2020, a social justice advocacy group.
Katherine Owojori, a pre-law student at USC, will work with Franco Rubio to produce the above-mentioned podcast. Owojori is an active member of Black Lives Matter: Los Angeles.
Past fellows involved in mainstream media, in the order in which their fellowship was awarded:
Cloee Cooper – PBS, The John Oliver Show, Huffington Post, The Guardian, Politico, Nevada Public Radio, Spectrum TV
Lam Thuy Vo – Buzzfeed News, The Wall Street Journal, Al Jazeera, NPR, ProPublica, The Guardian, The New York Times, ESPN
May Jeong – Vanity Fair, The New York Times, Harper’s, The Intercept
Shanita Hubbard – The New York Times, HuffPost, Essence Magazine, Fusion, The Root
Cynthia Greenlee – The Washington Post, The Atlantic, The New York Times, Vox, Self, Harper’s Bazaar, The Counter, American Prospect, Dissent, Ebony, Elle, Longreads, Salon, Smithsonian
Donovan Ramsey – The New York Times, The Atlantic, Buzzfeed, Ebony, GQ, New Republic, Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, Essence
Jenni Monet – The Guardian, Yes! Magazine, Los Angeles Times, PBS, Al Jazeera, Indian Country Today, Columbia Journalism Review
Julieta Martinelli – Futuro Media, Nashville Public Radio, CBS, Real Atlanta Magazine, Gwinnett Daily Post
James Kilgore – Medium, WIRED Magazine, Al Jazeera, Salon
Katie Rose Quandt – The Atlantic, Rolling Stone, The Appeal, The Nation, Vice, Slate, Mother Jones, Brooklyn Magazine, America Magazine
Ebony Underwood – Huffington Post, Vibe, USA Today, The Appeal, Vibe, Mic
Isaac Bailey – The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico, Time, Esquire, CNN, Nieman Reports
Nick August-Perna – National Geographic, PBS, HBO, Vox, Vice
Judith Levine – Harper’s Bazaar, The New York Times, Vogue, Mother Jones, The Nation, Boston Review, Salon
Maia Szalavitz – The New York Times, Time, The Washington Post, Elle, New York Magazine, New Scientist, Newsweek, CNN, MSNBC, NPR
Alisa Roth – NPR, CBS, PRI’s The World, Marketplace, The New York Times, Business Week, Nation
Mark Obbie – The Atlantic, The Trace, Politico, The New York Times, The American Lawyer, Texas Lawyer, Houston Post, Pacific Standard, Inc. Magazine, Slate
Osagie Obasogie – The New York Times, Slate, Scientific American, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, New Scientist
Seth Freed Wessler – Associated Press, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, ABC News, NPR, NBC, This American Life, Elle, PRI’s The World
Luis Trelles – NPR
James Ridgeway – Mother Jones, The Economist, Parade, Harper’s, The Nation, The New York Times, The Guardian, Al Jazeera
Jean Casella – Mother Jones, The Guardian, Solitary Watch, The Appeal, Al Jazeera, The Nation
Joel Medina – Huffington Post, Univision
Erin Siegal – The New York Times, Time, Rolling Stone, The New Yorker
Jonah Engle – The New York Times, BBC, NPR, Radio Netherlands International, Deutsche Welle, Atlanta Journal Constitution, Nation Magazine, Columbia Journalism Review, Denver Post, Haitian Times
Lisa Riordan Seville – NBC News, The Crime Report, The Nation, MSNBC, The Daily Beast, Salon
Hannah Rappleye – The Wall Street Journal, Mail & Guardian, The Nation, City Limits, The Crime Report, Salon.com, MSNBC
Chandra Thomas Whitfield – People, Essence, Ebony, The American Prospect, The Guardian, HuffPost, NBC News, NPR, U.S. News & World Report, Christian Science Monitor, MIT Technology Review, Time, Newsweek, The Root
Petra Bartosiewicz – Harper’s, Mother Jones, The Nation, New York Magazine, Texas Observer, This American Life
Amanda Crawford – Boston Globe, Businessweek, National Geographic, Chronicle of Higher Education, Ms. Magazine, Huffington Post, Arizona Republic, Baltimore Sun
Jesse Wegman – The New York Times, Reuters, Daily Beast, Newsweek, New York Observer
Renee Feltz – Democracy Now!, The Intercept, The New York Times, Texas Observer, PBS
Stokely Baksh – New Republic, Forbes, Mother Jones, The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones, Marketwatch, PBS, The Nation, Al Jazeera
Jessica Pupovac – PBS, NPR, WBEZ Chicago, The Chicago Journal
Nancy Mullane – NPR, American Public Media
Patrice Gaines – The Washington Post, NPR, Washington Informer, Yahoo News, NBC News, Yes! Magazine, New York Times, Essence
Jennifer Thompson-Cannino – The New York Times, Durham-Herald Sun, Tallahassee Democrat
JoAnn Mar – NPR, Voice of America, Pacifica Radio, CBS Radio, KALW-FM
Jonathan Mahler – The New York Times, The New Republic, Slate, New York Magazine, Bloomberg, HuffPost, MSN, CNBC, Yahoo
Laura Mansnerus – The New York Times, Detroit Free Press, Philadelphia Inquirer, MSN, The Boston Globe, Business Standard, Tampa Bay Times, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Paul Butler – MSNBC, NBC News, Nature, The Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, The Atlantic, Yahoo, People
Susan Koch – ABC, NBC, HBO, PBS, MTV, Discovery Channel, National Geographic
David Dent – The Daily Beast, PBS, HuffPost
Emily Bazelon – New York Times Magazine, Business Insider, HuffPost, MSN, The Independent, The Washington Post, ABC News, The Atlantic, Yahoo, Miami Herald, Vogue, RealClear Politics, Slate
Mary Beth Pfeiffer – Forbes, HuffPost, Scientific American, The Globe and Mail, The Hill, Newsday, RealClear Politics, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Steve Liss – Time, PBS
Amy Bach – New York Magazine, The New York Times, The Nation, Slate
Elizabeth Amon – Bloomberg News, The American Lawyer, The National Law Journal, The New York Times, Harper’s, The Imprint
Nathan Blakeslee – Texas Monthly, The Guardian, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Nation, Houston Chronicle, The Texas Observer
Robin Mejia – The Washington Post, Science, Mother Jones, LA Times, CNN
Slawomir Grunberg – PBS, HBO, ABC, NBC
Tyrone Turner – National Geographic, NPR, DCist
Brenda Kenneally – New York Times Magazine, Rolling Stone, Ms. Magazine
Jan Goodwin – New York Times Magazine, The Nation, Harper’s Bazaar, Marie-Claire, Real Simple, Reader’s Digest, Good Housekeeping, Ladies’ Home Journal
Sara Cantania – Los Angeles Times, Reuters
Adrian LeBlanc – Seventeen Magazine, New York Times Magazine, The New Yorker, Esquire
Alden Loury – Chicago Sun-Times, WBEZ-FM, The Chicago Reporter, WVIK-FM
John Biewen – NPR, American RadioWorks
Sasha Abramsky – The Nation, American Prospect, The Daily Beast, Columbia Journalism Review, The Atlantic, HuffPost, San Francisco Weekly, The Guardian, Mother Jones, New York Magazine
Andrew Lichtenstein – Yahoo, Business Insider, MSN, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, Al Jazeera, The New Republic
Dan Collison – Newsweek, NPR, Thomson Reuters Foundation
Eric Whitney – NPR, CNN, The Washington Post, WebMD, The Atlantic, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, New Jersey Public Radio
Nell Bernstein – The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, Buzzfeed, Cosmopolitan, Glamour, The Crime Report, The San Francisco Standard
Jennifer Gonnerman – The New Yorker, New York Magazine, Village Voice
Soros’ influence extends far beyond the media, however.
Soros has been the Democratic Party’s top donor for several years, buying himself massive sway in the federal government.
It was also recently revealed that a Soros-funded propaganda group was involved in the Big Tech coverup of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal in the run-up to the 2020 election.
Palumbo details how Soros uses his wealth to fund a power grab that finds its way right into the upper echelons of Democrat President Joe Biden’s White House.
Earlier this year, the hugely popular exposé was snubbed from the New York Times “Best Seller” list.
Unsurprisingly, Soros owns millions of dollars worth of stock in the newspaper.
Readers of the New York Times were perplexed by a crossword puzzle in the Sunday edition of the paper that appeared to be shaped like a swastika. Adding insult to injury in the minds of some was the fact that the puzzle was printed on the first day of Hanukkah
Several public figures used twitter to draw public attention to the controversial layout and ask the ‘newspaper of record’ how such an oversight made it to print on the day that one of Judaism’s most important holidays begins.
Donald Trump Jr., the son of former President Donald Trump, chimed in to claim that the outrage in the US would have been much bigger if an outlet “not ideologically aligned” with the readership of the Times had published it.
The newspaper’s subscribers traditionally lean left, with nine in ten people who cite it as their main news source identifying as Democrats, Pew Research reported in 2020.
The Jerusalem Post noted that this was not the first time the Times has come under fire for publishing crossword puzzles bearing a supposed swastika-likeness. Similar oversights happened in 2014 and 2017, the Israeli newspaper said.
In 2017, the NYT’s gaming section tweeted in response to accusations: “It’s NOT a swastika. Honest to God. No one sits down to make a crossword puzzle and says, ‘Hey! You know what would look cool?’”
The Fox News star gives voice to the concerns of millions – the part of America that some would prefer not to hear
“Ukraine’s leaders aren’t really hiding it anymore, they have total contempt for us,” Carlson said. “They just want our money. They don’t care about the United States even a little bit. This is not democracies uniting in solidarity. This is a scam.”
The jungle of the US media kingdom appears to be divided between two powerful entities – the pro-establishment behemoth often referred to as the mainstream media, and Tucker Carlson. And against all odds, Carlson appears to be winning.
It would be difficult to name a single person, aside from the rabble-rouser Donald J. Trump, who is more disgusting and/or terrifying (depending on who you ask) for the establishment media than Fox News host Tucker Carlson. This one man is considered such a threat that the New York Times in May spent a boatload of ink to assassinate his character in a 20,000-word hit piece. Ironically, the article backfired as it laid bare the reasons Americans no longer trust the ‘legacy media’.
Straight from the Grey Lady’s mouth: “‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ has presented a dominant narrative, recasting American racism to present white Americans as an oppressed caste. The ruling class uses fentanyl and other opioids to addict and kill legacy Americans, anti-white racism to cast them as bigots, feminism to degrade their self-esteem, immigration to erode their political power. Republican elites, however improbably, help to import the voters Democrats require at the ballot box. The United States, Mr. Carlson tells his viewers, is ‘ruled by mercenaries who feel no long-term obligation to the people they rule.’”
Those sentiments, which the piece dismisses out of hand as some wild conspiracy theories, are shared by tens of millions of average Americans whose trust in journalists and politicians is now at an all-time low.
Tucker Carlson Tonight is the second-most-watched show on cable news. In September, the 8pm opinion news-talk show averaged 3.09 million viewers. The concerns he raises, night after night, resonate with a lot of Americans, and if you attack and dismiss his work, you are attacking the millions of Americans who can relate. It’s as if the establishment media wants those concerns to disappear – and the public is on to it.
In a recent Gallup poll, it was found that just 34% of Americans trust the media to report the news “fully, accurately and fairly.” When you break down that shocking number, however, it becomes clearer why Tucker Carlson enrages the establishment so much: 70% of Democrats, 14% of Republicans, and 27% of independents say they trust the fourth estate. Naturally, those 70% of Democrats do not enjoy having their cherished belief systems exposed and ridiculed every evening by Mr. Carlson, nor do their loyal media outlets want to be exposed as a politically charged propaganda machine working on behalf of the Democratic Party.
Consider, for example, the recent Black Lives Matter movement. Following the death of George Floyd at the hands of a white cop, the entire country lost its collective mind in a bout of liberal insanity. In the coast-to-coast riots that broke out, not only were the American people expected to take a knee to this violent movement (which has since been exposed as a fraud that arguably never helped a single black person, apart from those who founded the organization to buy mansions), they were expected to endorse the defunding of the police. Carlson wasn’t buying any of it.
“This may be a lot of things, this moment we’re living through, but it is definitely not about black lives,” Carlson said. “Remember that when they come for you, and at this rate, they will.”
“Anyone who has ever been subjected to the rage of the mob knows the feeling,” he continued. “It’s like being swarmed by hornets. You cannot think clearly. And the temptation is to panic. But you can’t panic. You’ve got to keep your head and tell the truth… If you show weakness of any kind, they will crush you.” He was speaking from experience, too – back in 2018, Antifa protesters besieged his home, threatening his family and vandalizing his property.
Carlson’s lonely voice in the media wilderness sparked a massive backlash, with corporations, also heavily invested in the BLM movement to the tune of billions of dollars, pulling their advertising from his show, while establishment media shock troops quickly portrayed the Fox News host as a cold-blooded racist. Fortunately, Carlson has enough of a conservative base who agreed with his message and he survived the onslaught.
More recently, Carlson has come under liberal fire for his ‘support of Vladimir Putin’, who is now embroiled in a bitter conflict against Ukraine. Here, the Fox News host has shown incredible courage, for no other person in the world of politics since Genghis Khan has been more vilified than the Russian president. Carlson asked a simple thing of his audience: To consider what Putin has done to them personally that makes him such an object of visceral hate.
“It might be worth asking yourself, since it is getting pretty serious, what is this really about? Why do I hate Putin so much? Has Putin ever called me a racist? Has he threatened to get me fired for disagreeing with him? Has he shipped every middle-class job in my town to Russia? Did he manufacture a worldwide pandemic that wrecked my business and kept me indoors for two years? Is he teaching my children to embrace racial discrimination? Is he making fentanyl? Is he trying to snuff out Christianity? Does he eat dogs? Vladimir Putin didn’t do any of that.”
Not only did Carlson ask his listeners to think twice about Vladimir Putin being propped up as the premier global villain, he suggested that the real enemy of the American people is none other than Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, who has otherwise won fawning admiration from across the media spectrum.
At a time when the US-Mexico border is wide open, and inflation is spiralling out of control, only Carlson had the audacity to ask the simple question that millions of other Americans are also wondering: “Why are we still funding this?” Since the beginning of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, the US and its EU allies have forked over to Kiev around $126 billion worth of aid, a number almost equal to Ukraine’s entire 2020 GDP. And it seems that with every passing day, the Ukrainian leader demands more. And while it has been reported that much of the funds being sent to Ukraine never make it to the soldiers, it is the American people who must deal with the inflationary pressures from the limitless spending. How did Zelensky react to that news? Carlson quoted the Ukrainian leader as saying: “Inflation is nothing. Who is thinking about inflation? These things are secondary.” Secondary to what, you ask? Maybe like funnelling the wealth out of the country to Cote d’Azur?
“Ukraine’s leaders aren’t really hiding it anymore, they have total contempt for us,” Carlson said. “They just want our money. They don’t care about the United States even a little bit. This is not democracies uniting in solidarity. This is a scam.”
Incidentally, is it any wonder, then, that Russian television has demonstrated admiration for Carlson’s work, which is unique in that it is not tainted by raw anti-Russian propaganda? Just this week, the New York Times published an article alleging that Carlson and other US conservative voices had become “fixtures of internal news roundups, scripts and broadcasts” on various Russian news broadcasts. Apparently, this was supposed to demonstrate, once again, the nefarious relationship that exists between the Kremlin and the Republicans. In reality, it just shows how desperate the liberals have become to target Carlson and the Kremlin to help the Democrats advance on the political battlefield.
The establishment media would undoubtedly boost their ratings out of the basement if they started talking like that too, but because they have never in the past 20 years reported on an American war they didn’t like, it certainly will never criticize a US proxy war where the only thing the country loses, at least so far, is billions of dollars in taxpayer money. After all, as many of these warmongers want to believe, Ukraine could be Russia’s ‘Afghanistan War’ that is said to have brought down the Soviet Union, or just maybe the equivalent of the humiliating defeat America suffered in the Vietnam War. Either way, it doesn’t matter because the defense industry stands to gain enormous profits, which is what this is all about.
Whether they like it or not, Tucker Carlson remains a rare voice of candidness and honesty representing the genuine concerns of millions of Americans, which the establishment media would prefer to memory-hole.
In short: No one should be the gatekeepers of our history. Least of all those who laud their certitude in the face of the unknowable.
The mystery is exciting. The evidence is compelling. The series is engaging. Even if none of it turns out to be true, the questions are still worth asking.
Why has the popular Netflix documentary ignited the ire of the media?
It never ceases to amaze me what seemingly innocuous ideas the establishment media find ‘dangerous’ or ‘controversial’.
Netflix recently released an eight-part documentary series titled Ancient Apocalypse, where Graham Hancock (who has been a household name for “alternative archeology” since the release of his book ‘Fingerprints of the Gods’ in 1995), introduces us to his central theory that human civilisation is considerably older than current archeological orthodoxy believes, but that most evidence for this was wiped out by a colossal natural disaster around 12,000 years ago.
He supports this theory with physical evidence for such a natural disaster, curious geological anomalies and seemingly ancient megalithic structures.
He points out that the mainstream view of pre-history insists civilisation did not and had never existed before the year 4000BC, but that recent discoveries such as the Temple at Gobekli Tepe, which dates back to 9600BC call that mainstream view into question.
He also collates mythic stories and old legends from over around the world that all reference some massive, global catastrophe. (Floods, earthquakes, giant snakes in the sky, strange visitors from across the sea etc.) And then emphasises their many eerie similarities.
Through the collation of this research, Hancock then asks some questions of the mainstream view of our ancient history and posits a theory of his own – that ‘we are a species with amnesia’, who have forgotten our own past.
These are not new ideas, solely from Hancock’s imagination. Immanuel Velikovsy said something very similar half a century ago, in fact, his last book, published posthumously, was titled “Mankind in Amnesia”, and explored the psychological impact of us, as a species, repressing the memories and forgetting the stories that echo from a distant, traumatised past.
These questions might sound intriguing to you, or you may be indifferent to them, or you may even vehemently disagree with them, but I bet you didn’t know they were racist, did you?
That’s right. Racist. Don’t believe me, you conspiracy theorist? Just ask the Guardian.
Yes, the Graun has spoiled us with not just one hit-piece, but two! All in the space of one week.
Robin McKie writes his from an archaeological standpoint, while Stuart Heritage speaks as an entertainment critic. However, one is very much like the other. They both agree the Netflix series is wholly unacceptable. All of it. These are ‘dangerous ideas’ that shouldn’t be ‘allowed’.
McKie alleges Hancock’s claims reinforce ‘white supremacist ideas’, because questioning the age of human civilisation
…strip[s] indigenous people of their rich heritage and instead gives credit to aliens or white people”
McKie further explains:
Then there were the Nazis. Many swore by the idea that a white Nordic superior race – people of “the purest blood” – had come from Atlantis. As a result, Himmler set up an SS unit, the Ahnenerbe – or Bureau of Ancestral Heritage – in 1935 to find out where people from Atlantis had ended up after the deluge had destroyed their homeland.”
There we have it, you see! Don’t even bother linking to any sources, Robin (which he doesn’t). I hear you, loud and clear. The idea of Atlantis is inherently racist, because the Nazis believed in it.
The fact Hancock never mentions race, or white people (or aliens) in the series, nor (to the best of my knowledge) in any of his books, makes no difference to this.
So, what are you going to do now? Keep researching the Atlantis myth?
Like a Nazi would?
Of course, going by this logic, we should really do away with Christianity as well. God in general, in fact. Perhaps we should cancel Volkswagen and Wagner too. Nazis also brushed their teeth and wore shoes, I believe, neither of which shall I be taking part in from this day onwards, just to be sure.
So, there we have it – Ancient Apocalypse is racist, even though it never mentions race.
The remainder of their twin critiques is no better argued or supported by reality. Here is a typical example of the intellectual level they work on:
For a story that was first told 2,300 years ago, the myth of Atlantis has demonstrated a remarkable persistence over the millennia. Originally outlined by Plato, the tale of the rise of a great, ancient civilisation followed by its cataclysmic destruction has since generated myriad interpretations.”
It was this opening paragraph alone that prompted my response. As it is so uniquely meaningless.
What does he mean by ‘For a story 2,300 years old it has demonstrated remarkable persistence’? As opposed to what? All those other stories that we don’t know about? How is that measurable, exactly?
Besides, we have a plethora of stories and mythologies dating back two and a half thousand years, and even much further into the past than that. Including all the Greco-Roman myths, plays by Sophocles and Aesop’s Fables. We have detailed legends and lore passed down from Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Old Testament fits the bill as well.
And of course, Homer’s Iliad, which describes the fabled Trojan War.
Let us remember that the City of Troy was also believed to have been just a myth until we discovered that it wasn’t. And I’m sure before 1870, when it was first discovered, that there was no shortage of academics decrying the search for Troy as a heretical waste of time.
What is the essential attraction of the tale? For answers we only have to look at the works of Tolkien, CS Lewis, HP Lovecraft, Conan Doyle, Brecht and a host of science fiction writers who have all found the myth an irresistible inspiration.”
Simplicity itself! The reason the Atlantis myth is so popular is because it’s so popular!
Robin then asserts as fact that Plato intended the tale of Atlantis to be little more than an allegory. There is no way of knowing that, of course, he merely asserts it and then goes into a Gish Gallop.
“As to the likely site of the original Atlantis, the serious money goes on the destruction of the Greek island of Santorini and its impact on Crete and puts the blame on volcanic eruptions – not errant comets, as Hancock argues”
Whoa there, Robin. Firstly, Graham Hancock never ‘argues’ that the Greek island of Santorini was struck by an errant comet. That is misleading. He argues that a comet struck somewhere in North America and rising sea levels may have obliterated an island civilisation (that Plato calls Atlantis) in the Atlantic Ocean. It’s only you, Robin, who is conflating this Atlantis myth with Santorini.
[NB – Robin also fails to mention the physical evidence for just such an impact at the beginning of the Younger Dryas.]
Secondly, should we not give credit where credit is due, and assume that Plato (and Solon, from whom Plato got the story, and the Dynastic Egyptians, from whom Solon got the story), most likely knew the difference between ‘inside the Mediterranean’ and ‘outside the Mediterranean’?
If they place Atlantis beyond the Pillars of Hercules, should we not at least consider it possible that this is indeed where “the original Atlantis” was? (I invite readers to listen to Plato’s accounting yourselves and see what you make of it, here is an unabridged and well-produced reading.)
The history of Santorini’s volcanic eruption was probably, by contrast, relatively well known. Santorini didn’t actually sink, after all, as Atlantis is said to have done. It’s still there. The Ancient Greeks called it ‘Thera’ and they were perfectly well aware of its existence. It shares no cultural, historical or technological similarities to Plato’s description of Atlantis at all, short of ‘being an island’.
But none of that bothers McKie who at this point, and without ceremony, just sort of stops writing. Job Done. Atlantis debunked. What’s for lunch?
Moving on to Stuart Heritage’s piece, which is thankfully briefer but in no way less smug. In his subheading, he boldly asks:
“Why has this been allowed?”
Allowed?
I’m not sure which authority he’s calling on here. Netflix execs? Local, national or perhaps global government? Or maybe it’s rhetorical, and he’s beseeching the Lord God himself how such evil could come into the world.
Beyond this, Stuart seems even less interested in debunking or debating these ‘dangerous ideas’ than McKie was, and far more focused on analysing and ridiculing its (presumed) target audience.
Fortunately, Stuart, with his view unbiased and his mind wide open, has discerned exactly who that is in the first five minutes – because he saw (or thinks he saw) Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson flash up in the pre-show reel.
Joe Rogan appears in one quick interview, which is used in the first episode and the last.
Jordan Peterson does not appear in this documentary at all.
And I’m really not sure why Stuart thought he did. Perhaps he just didn’t watch closely enough to realise this before rushing his five-hundred words off to be published in one of the largest news outlets in the world.
More notably when Heritage later amended the change, he just removed the ‘Jordan Peterson’ reference and neither he nor the editors or sub-eds even bothered to correct the syntax:
“Fortunately, you don’t have to watch for long to find out. In quick succession, during the pre-show sizzle reel, we are treated to a clip of the show’s host Graham Hancock being interviewed by Joe Rogan.”
The laziness is staggering.
Just ‘a different person’. It’s not important who anymore. He’s not on the Guardian’s ‘naughty list.’
Equally strangely, both McKie and Heritage seem to think ‘Ancient Apocalypse’ makes claims of ‘super intelligent beings’ and ‘aliens’, when it simply does not.
Hancock’s argument – whether you accept it or not – is that human beings were more advanced than academia admits. Not robots with flying cars, but more advanced than we currently give them credit for, and he cites evidence for this which both Stuart & Robin ignore in favour of critiquing Hancock for things he does not say.
They cite no sources and debate no actual claims. They use buzzwords and identity politics in place of analysis and between the two of them couldn’t fill one page of A4. It’s as if even they (and their editors) had no faith or interest in what they were doing.
Although Stuart does rather give the game away in his closing statement.
“That’s the danger of a show like this. It whispers to the conspiracy theorist in all of us. And Hancock is such a compelling host that he’s bound to create a few more in his wake. Believing that ultra-intelligent creatures helped to build the pyramids is one thing, but where does it end? Believing that election fraud is real? Believing 9/11 was an inside job? Worse?”
He’s got me stumped there. Because, for the life of me, I literally can’t think of anything worse than ‘believing in election fraud’, which is obviously as fanciful as believing in the Loch Ness Monster. What next? Believing in tax evasion!?
Presumably, he’s referring to the 2020 US election. Because the Guardian has claimed fraud is very real in some elections. Russia, Syria, Bolivia, Brazil, Libya, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela to name a few.
And they were pretty darn adamant that it was Russian collusion that got Trump into office in 2016.
Stuart presumably believes election fraud is only a ‘conspiracy theory’ when it happens here, in the UK. Either that or he believes it has literally never happened. Ever. In the whole history of the world.
Or perhaps he’s simply typing up any old nonsense just to get that word count a little higher. Sense and consistency be damned.
Who’s to say?
However, the fragile honesty underlying this is quite telling. He is essentially saying:
“If people become skeptical of one thing, they may become skeptical of another.”
Which is to be expected, but what I can’t understand is how anybody could think this is a bad thing.
People should be skeptical. Skepticism in all things but cynicism in none. People should ask questions, and they should expect answers, especially from those who profess to know them. One should be open-minded and always pursue the truth. And to better decipher what that may be, we need people sharing new ideas, questioning the mainstream view and challenging the established narrative as new evidence presents itself. We need that. Science, progress and discovery all depend on it. Even if the ideas turn out to be false. Prove them false.
In short: No one should be the gatekeepers of our history. Least of all those who laud their certitude in the face of the unknowable.
The mystery is exciting. The evidence is compelling. The series is engaging. Even if none of it turns out to be true, the questions are still worth asking.
These ideas are only ‘dangerous’ if you fear what they question.
“Our citizens should know the urgent facts…but they don’t because our media serves imperial, not popular interests. They lie, deceive, connive and suppress what everyone needs to know, substituting managed news misinformation and rubbish for hard truths…”—Oliver Stone
Tales from the Conspiratum 
