Elite Dems Spent Big Money to Recall San Francisco DA who Promised to Address Racial Disparities in the Justice system, Reduce Incarceration and Hold Cops Accountable

From [HERE] San Francisco residents voted to recall district attorney Chesa Boudin, one of the nation’s most progressive top prosecutors, on June 7. Political groups spending on efforts to recall Boudin reported raking in more than $7 million in contributions while the anti-recall camp raised about $3 million.

Several of the donors giving to recall Boudin are also frequent donors to Republican candidates and conservative causes.

Boudin, once a public defender who switched sides of the courtroom to become a prosecutor, was elected San Francisco’s DA in 2019 after he ran on a platform of addressing racial disparities in the justice system, reducing incarceration, lowering penalties for lower-level offenses and holding police accountable. His victory was one of the most prominent in a growing national progressive prosecutor movement.

But a recall campaign focused on concerns about crime and public safety proved to be Boudin’s downfall. In the final result of the recall, 55% of San Franciscans voted to recall Boudin – 122,588 San Franciscans voted “yes,” with 100,177 voting “no.” 

Pundits pointed to the election results as evidence of the growing discontent within the Democratic electorate with progressive policy on criminal justice, particularly in regards to low-income minority voters. Others have pushed back, emphasizing that many of the neighborhoods in San Francisco with the largest Black and Latino populations were least supportive of Boudin’s recall.

A single PAC, Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, accounted for two-thirds of the money spent in favor of the recall campaign, according to San Francisco Ethics Commission data analyzed by OpenSecrets. In total, the PAC spent nearly $4.8 million of the roughly $7 million dropped against Boudin, the majority of which came from various wealthy donors in either the real estate industry or the finance industry.

The two largest donors to Neighbors For A Better San Francisco were Shorenstein Realty Services with $633,000 and local billionaire investor William Oberndorf with over $602,000. 

Shorenstein Realty Services is a San Francisco based property management company run by Brandon Shorenstein, son of the late San Francisco real estate mogul Doug Shorenstein and heir to the $1.3 billion Shorenstein family estate. Shorenstein is a financial supporter of the Democratic Party and has previously given to Democratic politicians including former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).

“At Shorenstein, we take seriously our role as a corporate citizen, and are proud of our long history of investing behind initiatives and programs that advance the safety and betterment of San Francisco for all its residents,” said a spokesperson for Shorenstein Realty Services when reached for comment by OpenSecrets. “Our fellow San Franciscans have shown that leadership can and will be held accountable, and we look forward to continuing to work together to build a better, stronger and safer city.”

Oberndorf is the founder of Oberndorf Enterprises LLC, a San Francisco based investment firm. He is a regular donor to Republican politicians, including political contributions to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Oberndorf has given over $11 million in political contributions to Republican-aligned PACs and super PACs since 2011. 

Boudin told the New York Timesthat in 2019, Oberndorf offered to support Boudin’s campaign if he would oppose San Francisco’s status as a sanctuary city. Boudin claims he refused this offer and Oberndorf became upset. When Oberndorf was reached for comment by the New York Times he denied this allegation. 

The third-largest donor to the PAC is Jean-Pierre Conte, a managing director at San Francisco based private equity firm Genstar Capital, who gave $503,800. Although Conte has given considerably to various state-level Democratic committees, such as the Democratic Party of Nevada and the Democratic Party of New Mexico, he has also given political contributions to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. 

Other significant donors to the PAC are longtime financial contributors to Republican candidates and Republican-aligned PACs, including local real estate company Kilroy Realty Services, who donated $167,000, the chairwoman of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco Diane Wilsey, who donated $50,000, and Route One Investment LLC founder William Duhamel, who gave $160,000. Duhamel also gave $40,000 to other groups spending on the recall.

Outside of Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, the next biggest donations to the recall campaign all came from donors in the real estate, business, and tech industries:

• California Association of Realtors ($458,000)

• The National Association of Realtors ($100,000)

• Local tech investor Garry Tan ($100,000)

• The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce’s PAC SF Forward ($90,000)

• PayPal founding COO David Sacks ($75,000)

Anti-recall contributions from criminal justice reform organizations and others not enough to bridge funding gap

A large portion of the money raised for the anti-recall campaign – over $700,000 – came from criminal justice reform groups like Smart Justice, Real Justice PAC and the American Civil Liberties Union. The anti-recall effort also received about $250,000 in contributions from two service employee unions, SEIU Local 2015 and SEIU Local 1021.

The anti-recall campaign didn’t drum up the same support from big donors as the pro-recall effort. Instead, the anti-recall camp received a significant portion of its funds from small donors. 

Heart Disease in Children Explodes Since the Vaccine

From [MERCOLA] Heart conditions in children who don’t normally get heart disease are being reported since they started getting the COVID jabs, and The Irish Light is bringing light to the topic by criticizing mainstream media for its silence on the topic.

To ignore this and continue onward with the shot program is “the greatest crime ever committed by an Irish government,” the newsletter says, but “as hard as the HSE tries to cover up the horrifying impact of the COVID vaccine on Irish children, there is no containing the staggering toll of sudden deaths in young people.”

A sudden rise in hepatitis cases is suspicious, too, the newsletter says: “Why are so many healthy children dying? What has changed in their lives to cause it? We all know the answer but many still do not have the courage to say it out loud because they too may meet the same fate.”

While it’s being ignored right now, it won’t be forever, the newsletter suggests, because “soon the dam of silence will burst because the injury levels are too alarming to ignore.”

How the Media Secretly Carries Out Assignments for the CIA: "Anti-disinformation” has nothing to do with protecting the public and everything to do with controlling the population and hiding truths

From [MERCOLA] STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• The “anti-disinformation” industry has nothing to do with protecting a gullible public from information that might cause them to make bad or unhealthy choices. It’s about creating and directing a narrative for the purpose of controlling the population and hiding truths that might overthrow the ruling cabal and its plans for a one world government

• In 1948, the CIA’s Office of Special Projects launched Operation Mockingbird, a clandestine CIA media infiltration campaign that involved bribing hundreds of journalists to publish fake stories at the CIA’s request

• During the Cold War, CIA propaganda disparaged communist ideologies. Today, it promotes radical ideas that bring us closer to The Great Reset — which is based on a technocratic economic system — instead

• Most of the organizations claiming to promote truth and counter disinformation are in fact doing the exact opposite. The latest and most blatant example of this was the Biden administration’s “Ministry of Truth” — the Disinformation Governance Board, set up by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

• Evidence shows scholars and academics who speak out against the establishment narrative on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine are being targeted by media personalities working hand-in-hand with the intelligence apparatus

The June 21, 2022, Grayzone article,1 “British Security State Collaborator Paul Mason’s War on ‘Rogue Academics’ Exposed,” shines a great big light on what the “anti-disinformation” industry is really all about.

Spoiler alert: It has nothing to do with protecting a gullible public from information that might cause them to make bad or unhealthy choices. No, it’s about creating and directing a narrative for the purpose of controlling the population and hiding truths that might overthrow the ruling cabal and its plans for a one world government.

Operation Mockingbird

Propaganda is as old as humanity itself, but the modern version of it can be traced back to 1948, when the CIA’s Office of Special Projects2 launched Operation Mockingbird,3,4 a clandestine CIA media infiltration campaign that involved bribing hundreds of journalists to publish fake stories at the CIA’s request.

The CIA reportedly spent $1 billion a year (about one-third of its entire budget5) on this enterprise. CIA-recruited journalists worked in most major news organizations, including CBS News, Time, Life, Newsweek and The New York Times, just to name a few.6 Later on, the campaign expanded to include foreign media as well.7 As reported by the Free Press:8

“In 1976, Senator Frank Church’s investigation into the CIA exposed their corruption of the media ... The tactic was straightforward. False news reports or propaganda would be provided by CIA writers to knowing and unknowing reporters who would simply repeat the falsehoods over and over again.”

During the Cold War, CIA propaganda disparaged communist ideologies. Today, it promotes radical ideas that bring us closer to The Great Reset — which is based on a technocratic economic system — instead.

Media Is More Controlled Than Ever

While Operation Mockingbird is said to have been officially dismantled, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest it’s still in operation. If anything, the system has only gotten more efficient and effective, as the number of major media outlets has shrunk over these past decades, and a vast majority of journalists and news anchors simply parrot what’s reported by the three global news agencies.

What’s more, the CIA isn’t the only intelligence agency using the media for its own propaganda purposes. The intelligence agencies in other countries do it too.

For example, leaked documents9 reveal Reuters and BBC News received multimillion-dollar contracts to advance a covert propaganda program by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) aimed at weakening Russia’s influence over its neighbors.10 You can learn more about this in “Reuters and BBC Caught Taking Money for Propaganda Campaign.”

One of the biggest changes we’re seeing right now is that most of the world’s intelligence agencies are controlling media in the same direction — toward The Great Reset and the technocratic control of the global population. That’s why we’re seeing the same narratives playing all over the world.

In 1977 Carl Bernstein wrote a 75-page article for Rolling Stone that exposed the CIA’s involvement with the media in even greater detail.11 Those were the days when Rolling Stone actually did decent investigative journalism. Today they are one of the largest spreaders of government disinformation.

It’s the Opposite of What They Claim It Is

It’s no small irony that most of the organizations claiming to promote truth and counter disinformation are in fact doing the exact opposite. The latest and most blatant example of this was the Biden administration’s “Ministry of Truth” — the Disinformation Governance Board,12,13 set up by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

It didn’t quite go as planned though. It was announced and then canceled just as quickly in the face of political and public backlash. The Orwellian connotations were just so blatant, few were able to dismiss them.

Perhaps they overestimated the level of brainwashing achieved over the past two years. They probably thought they could get away with what amounts to ripping up the U.S. Constitution in front of everyone’s face, but the time was not yet ripe for that kind of frontal assault.

If anything, it worked against them because many have suspected government uses media and Big Tech to censor and control narratives, and the past two years have provided undeniable evidence of that reality. So, the attempt to formalize this unlawful influence completely failed — for now.

Covert Assault on Academics

Getting back to The Grayzone story, Paul Mason, “one of Britain’s most prominent alleged left-wing journalists,” and other “covert helpers,” were found to have targeted scholars and academics who spoke out against the establishment narrative on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

As explained by Jimmy Dore in the featured video, Mason is basically pretending to be a left-leaning journalist but is working with the intelligence community to destroy political opponents. Emails obtained by The Grayzone and reviewed by Dore shows Mason is in favor of “relentless deplatforming,” getting people kicked off PayPal, demonetized by YouTube and so on. The Grayzone writes:14

“Amidst his campaign to neutralize the UK antiwar left, Paul Mason declared in an email to several academics willing to inform on and undermine their own colleagues: ‘the far left rogue academics is who I’m after ... The important task is to quarantine their ‘soft’ influencers and expose/stigmatize the hard ideologists.’

Mason’s fishing expedition was conducted in apparent coordination with Andy Pryce, a senior British intelligence official involved in a series of malign information warfare and censorship initiatives.

The journalist’s key academic enabler, self-styled counter-disinformation researcher Emma Briant, not only helped further his campaign to target antiwar figures, but furnished bogus claims about one individual which appears to have inspired a BBC smear piece ... Many of those she snitched on considered her a colleague and even a comrade.”

The Grayzone details how Briant introduced Mason with two individuals who would be able to furnish a meme-tracing tool to determine their source. Mason specifically wanted to find out “who in Britain denies the Bucha massacre” (thinks it’s a false flag) and/or believes Russia’s justifications for the invasion of Ukraine.

Ironically, the people Mason was most eager to trap weren’t falling into it, as they weren’t publicly discussing their views. Briant then offered to provide Mason with the names of the main organizers of an academic mailing list called “Organized Persuasive Communication,” run by Piers Robinson, described by Grayzone as “a dissident academic who has been relentlessly targeted in UK mainstream media.”

“Robinson was shocked to learn that a participant on his listserv was ratting out fellow members to a security state collaborator,” The Grayzone writes.15 “‘I’m dismayed that a former colleague whom I have supported over the years appears to have abused an academic listserv,’ Robinson told The Grayzone.

‘Rather than engaging in open debate and critique, which would have been the scholarly and ethical thing to do, Briant has instead sought to support what seems to be underhand and nefarious attempts to damage reputations and silence critics.’”

In the featured Jimmy Dore Show video, Dore interviews Max Blumenthal, a Grayzone contributor, about this and related stories they’ve written about Mason and his covert relationship with the British government. Blumenthal details how The Grayzone was censored by YouTube, for the first time ever, after they started exposing Mason, and it seems clear YouTube was responding to demands by Mason himself.

This suggests he is indeed working for or with British intelligence. We’ve seen the same kind of censoring at the request of the U.S. government.

A Case of the Pot Calling the Kettle Black

One of the people singled out by Briant as a Russian collaborator was Greg Simons, “a communications researcher at Sweden’s Uppsala University specializing in Russian mass media,” whose only crime was filling out and circulating a survey relating to conflicts and war on the behalf of a Russian academic who was working on a research paper.

Not even the Russian academic could be rightly accused of being a threat to democracy, as he’d “played a key role in Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev’s liberalization agenda, freeing political prisoners, ending regulations on foreign travel, and enshrining fundamental rights in the country’s new constitution,” The Grayzone writes. Commenting on Briant’s betrayal, Simons told The Grayzone:16

“This puts a big spotlight on the professional integrity and knowledge of Briant, who spreads propaganda and misinformation on people, something claims on her Twitter profile to fight. It also demonstrates a clear lack of personal integrity and deficiency in knowledge on topics that she claims to be an expert in.”

The Spook Behind It All

Behind Mason’s and Briant’s pet project to “neutralize the U.K.’s grassroots antiwar left” is Andy Pryce, founding director of the Counter Disinformation and Media Development (CDMD) program at the British Foreign Office. In 2018, Pryce was also “exposed as a key player in the scandalous MI6/military intelligence project known as the Integrity Initiative.” The Grayzone writes:

“A January 2020 European Commission event listing identifies Pryce as the head of public diplomacy at UKREP, London’s diplomatic mission to the EU. 

However, the same month Pryce appeared at the EU event, UKREP was replaced with a new office, the UK Mission to Europe, and Pryce has not been publicly mentioned in any official capacity since. So where did he go?

In his communications with Mason, Pryce mentions his personal involvement in activities placing him at the forefront of London’s public relations strategy on the Ukraine crisis, which is delivered by the recently formed Government Information Cell (GIC) and Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU). 

Staffed by spies and charged with disseminating intelligence through the media and other forums for the purpose of information warfare, both the units have operated in highly clandestine fashion. Largely unknown to the public, they have played a pivotal part in NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine.”

‘Conspiracy Theorist’ Is a Propaganda Smear

Over the past two years, the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” have become household terms for anything and everyone who doesn’t agree with whatever crazy story the media claim to be fact. Few seem to realize that in using these terms, they’ve fallen for the oldest propaganda methods there is: When you can’t argue with the facts, just attack the person delivering them.

Calling someone a ‘conspiracy theorist’ is a strategy aimed at silencing dissent in general and truth in particular, plain and simple.

Belittling people and making them look silly, stupid, ignorant, gullible or incompetent are classic attack strategies by propagandists who don’t really have a leg to stand on otherwise. It’s all about firing up people’s negative emotions, which makes them less likely to sit back and evaluate both sides.

So, calling someone a “conspiracy theorist” is a strategy aimed at silencing dissent in general and truth in particular, plain and simple. In terms of health, COVID-19 reporting has taken censorship and media manipulation to brand new heights, eclipsing just about all previous propaganda efforts. They don’t even hide the bias anymore.

Many believe that the term “conspiracy theory” was actually created by the CIA in 1967 to disqualify those who questioned the official version of John F Kennedy’s assassination and doubted that his killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, had acted alone. It makes perfect sense since Oliver Stone has shared credible evidence that the CIA was behind the JFK assassination.

When it comes to the COVID jab, for example, we know the U.S. government spent $1 billion on a media campaign to build public confidence in, and uptake of, the injections using mainstream news outlets.17

In return for that paycheck, media rabidly lashed out at anyone who questioned the unsupported claim that the shots were “safe and effective” as either a crazy conspiracy theorist, an ignorant science-denier, a dangerous misinformation agent with a personal profit motive, a domestic terrorist hell-bent on maximizing the death toll, or all four. All the while, media never actually countered the data showing the narrative was riddled with holes and contradictory at its face.

An example of how these kinds of smears have been, and continue to be, used by media, consider the June 19, 2022, Guardian article18 by Mark Townsend. He wrote:

“A network of more than two dozen conspiracy theorists, frequently backed by a coordinated Russian campaign, sent thousands of disinformation tweets to distort the reality of the Syrian conflict and deter intervention by the international community, new analysis reveals.”

As reported by The Hill (video above), Townsend identified Grayzone journalist Aaron Maté as “the most prolific spreader of disinformation” about the Syrian conflict “among the 28 conspiracy theorists identified.”

In a tweet, Maté responded to the article, stating Townsend had failed to contact him for comment, failed to provide any example of his alleged “disinformation” on the Syrian conflict, and failed to disclose the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) think tank responsible for the “analysis” is funded by the U.S. and U.K. governments and allied nations.

According to The Hill, Townsend was on vacation and not available for comment, but Katie Halper, who cohosts the “Useful Idiots” podcast with Maté came on to discuss Townsend’s attempted hack job. “Perhaps this can be a teachable moment for Townsend,” she said.

Not only did Townsend violate three basic standards of journalism, but the article’s main premise is also based on a lie, Halper says. The Guardian actually corrected the initial headline, which read “Russia-Backed Network of Syria Conspiracy Theorists Identified.” Since there’s no evidence of Russia backing any of these individuals, the headline was changed to the slightly less libelous “Network of Syria Conspiracy Theorists Identified.”

Townsend’s piece appears to be nothing more than a government-backed “Mockingbird”-style counterattack aimed at silencing Maté, who has been challenging the official narrative about the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria,19 and even delivered remarks to the United Nations Security Council on the matter.20

Considering he’s implicating both the U.S. and U.K., it seems rather obvious that Townsend’s article is an intentional propaganda piece aimed at chipping away Maté’s credibility. It can be helpful to always remember that we are, in fact, at war. It’s an information war, and the ruling powers whose aim it is to usher us into a new system of technocracy have many secrets.

They’ve rigged the game of life in a thousand different ways, and if people understood just how we’ve been robbed and enslaved, they’d become uncontrollable. Hence, the propaganda machine is in full swing, trying to control all aspects and shut down all truth tellers, lest the populace get wise to their games.

Truly, this now applies to just about every part of life. Politics, election integrity, the economy, the food system, energy, health and medicine, wars and conflicts — you name it — it’s all been rigged and it’s all falling apart.

The old guard is shooting for a controlled demolition of the old so they can transition to the new — which will be even more enslaving — but in order for that sleight of hand to work, pesky truth tellers must be silenced and the populace kept intellectually sedated. Don’t fall into that trap. One way to avoid it, is to interpret smears for what they are — attempts to silence. And ask yourself what the propagandists don’t want you to know.

PPI's New Correctional Contracts Library shows you what companies are profiting off of incarcerated people in your area

From [PPI] Today, we launched the new Correctional Contracts Library, which contains documents that show how companies profit on the backs of incarcerated people and their families. Through our twenty years of work to expose and stop the abusive practices of private companies, we’ve amassed a collection of hundreds of documents, including contracts, bids, evaluations, and more. These documents provide a paper trail showing how for-profit companies work with jails and prisons to squeeze money out of people who can least afford it. Our collection is now publicly available through this new tool.

The Library includes documents related to phone service, tablets, electronic messaging, commissary, and more. We’ve organized them so you can search for records from a specific facility or filter documents by state, vendor, service, or type. And we’ve provided some notes and remarks about the documents to help users understand what they contain and where they came from.

Using this new resource:

• Organizers can monitor when their local jail is scheduled to renegotiate its contracts for services and pressure it to secure the best deal for people that are behind bars;

• Journalists can assess whether prisons and jails in their area are helping companies exploit incarcerated people and their families;

• Researchers can track how the cottage industry of companies that profit off of incarceration is developing new ways to sap profits from people in prison and jail; and

• Policymakers can examine contract terms and identify problematic practices that need to stop.

This new tool does not have every prison or jail contract document that exists. We’re sharing our records, but we know our collection isn’t exhaustive. If you don’t see the documents you’re looking for, we’ve put together a guide to help you submit your own public records request to get them.

If you have documents that you think should be in this library, you can send them to us or, if you have a lot of files, use this form to send us a message telling us what you have.

This new database is the latest addition to our Advocacy Toolkit. Through the Toolkit, we’re giving advocates and organizations access to the data, lessons, and resources we’ve honed in our twenty years of working to end mass incarceration in America.

Profit Over People: The commercial bail industry perpetuates unjust cash bail systems and relies on egregious practices to protect its bottom line

Introduction and summary

From [HERE] On any given day in 2022, 658,000 people are incarcerated in jails across the country, more than 80 percent of whom are awaiting trial to determine if they will be convicted of a crime.1 Although courts have determined that most people can safely await their trial while remaining in their communities, the inability to afford the cost of cash bail prevents thousands of people from accessing pretrial release.

The pretrial process that is supposed to protect community safety and ensure access to justice has been corrupted by the corporate influence of the commercial bail industry. A small group of large insurance corporations oversees a web of private companies that make an estimated profit of $2.4 billion each year.2 For-profit bail companies get rich by foisting nonrefundable costs onto the very people who can least afford the cost of bail, most often people experiencing poverty and people of color. These costs are owed even if the charges are dropped or the person is found not guilty at trial.

The commercial bail industry actively defends cash bail systems that produce racially3 and economically unjust outcomes,4 high rates of pretrial incarceration,5 significant costs to taxpayers,6 and negative public safety consequences7 The commercial bail industry traps people who cannot afford cash bail premiums in a predatory cycle of debt and incarceration, in the same way that payday loan companies and other predatory lenders make a profit by taking advantage of people who need help affording the necessities of daily life.8 Moreover, commercial bail companies operate with little oversight or accountability, frequently engaging in abusive and unethical practices that jeopardize public trust and undermine the legal system’s ability to administer justice.

This report is presented in five sections. The first section provides context for the two-tiered systems—one for the rich, one for the poor—in which the commercial bail industry operates. The second section outlines the stakeholders in the commercial bail industry and describes their roles in the commercial bail process. The third section explores harmful practices many industry stakeholders engage in, to the detriment of their individual clients and the broader community. The fourth section highlights how legislation has expanded the use of commercial bail bonds while current regulatory frameworks fail to provide necessary accountability and oversight. Finally, the fifth section makes recommendations for various state-level reforms. It is crucial that policymakers implement solutions to rein in the commercial bail industry and protect clients from industry abuses.

Two-tiered cash bail systems reinforced by the commercial bail industry

The practice of assigning cash bail as a condition of an individual’s pretrial release has led to two-tiered systems of justice. People with money can return to their communities while they await trial, while those without money are forced to choose between remaining incarcerated—and facing the harms that accompany pretrial detention—and entering into a predatory contract with a commercial bail company to obtain release.

For people without the resources to pay a full bail amount, the only way to avoid pretrial incarceration in the vast majority of states without a state-run cash bail system is to hire a commercial bail bond company to pay on their behalf. These companies promote themselves as providing a public service, but in reality, they capitalize on unjust cash bail systems to extract their profit from underresourced individuals and families.

In exchange for a fee, called a premium, commercial bail agents enter into an agreement with the court that they will pay an individual’s full bail amount if the individual fails to appear in court.9 This transaction places the responsibility of ensuring individuals return to court on the commercial bail agent. The premium amount is typically from 10 percent to 15 percent of the total bail assignment.10 Unlike cash bail deposits made by those who can afford to pay them upfront, premiums collected by agents are nonrefundable. Premiums are not returned to the individual even in cases of false or illegal arrest, when charges are dropped, or when an individual is found not guilty.11 From 2011 to 2015 in Maryland, $75 million in nonrefundable premiums was paid by people whose cases did not result in a conviction.12

Today, the setting of cash bail is an arbitrary practice. Those who enforce a jurisdiction’s bail policies (bail setters) often rely on bail schedules—arbitrary lists of cash bail amount recommendations for different charges13—rather than conducting a meaningful assessment to determine the conditions that would best support a released individual, ensure their appearance in court, and protect public safety.14 Bail setters regularly assign unaffordable bail amounts without considering an individual’s ability to pay,15 even though most Americans lack the resources to cover many emergency expenses. This is due in large part to the reliance on commercial bail companies to cover the costs that individuals cannot afford to pay.

In 2017, 57 percent of Americans could not afford a $500 emergency expense without incurring debt.16 Because of the systemic inequities in criminalization and enforcement practices that target people from underinvested communities, people involved with the criminal legal system tend to have fewer financial resources than the U.S. population as a whole. In fact, in 2019, 80 percent of people involved with the criminal legal system were assessed as being legally “indigent,”17 meaning they were “unable to afford the necessities of life.”18 Still, the median bail amount for felonies in 2009 was $10,000,19 meaning a person arrested on a felony charge would have to pay $1,000 to secure their release. The commercial bail industry capitalizes on these economic vulnerabilities by offering to pay the cost of an individual’s release and extracting payment regardless of the outcome of the case.

Racially disparate bail assignment practices also make people of color more likely to need a commercial bail bond to afford release.23 From 2011 to 2015, Black people in Maryland paid nearly 2 1/2 times more in premium payments than all other races combined.24 In practice, cash bail systems extract wealth from the same Black communities that have faced generations of intentional disinvestment.

Furthermore, recent reforms have demonstrated that cash bail is unnecessary—and often unhelpful—to protect community safety and ensure appearance in court. For example, many jurisdictions have implemented bail reform without any significant increase in recidivism rates.25 After New Jersey implemented bail reform in 2017, the state saw decreases in the rate of all categories of crime. Violent crime rates decreased 18 percent immediately following reform.26 In 2018, Philadelphia ended the practice of prosecutors requesting cash bail for many misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies without seeing any increase in recidivism.27 In Harris County, Texas, where misdemeanor bail reform was initiated under a consent decree in 2019, rearrest rates have remained stable.28 Despite widespread disinformation surrounding bail reform in New York City, a recent report by the city’s comptroller revealed that pretrial rearrest rates were nearly identical before and after bail reform was implemented.29

Current bail setting and commercial bail practices ignore the fact that most people who are arrested are safe to be in the community. The vast majority of people arrested in the United States are arrested on nonviolent charges. In 2016, less than 5 percent of arrests were for charges of violent crime.30 In 2020, the rates of property crime were approximately 2,100 per 100,000 people, while violent crime rates were 379 per 100,000 people.31 Cash bail systems’ reliance on arbitrary bail schedules incarcerates people based on their access to money, draining taxpayer resources even when there is little risk to public safety. Systems that rely on cash bail produce high rates of unnecessary pretrial incarceration,32 which is known to increase recidivism.33 One study found that assigning cash bail was associated with a 6 percent to 9 percent increase in the rate of recidivism.34 [MORE]

No Matter What Costume NYPD Wear They Still Have SuperPowers to Initiate Unprovoked Acts of Violence. If People Dont Have a Right to Initiate Unprovoked Acts of Violence How Did Cops Get their Powers?

DEFINITELY FEEL MUCH SAFER WITHOUT CARRYING A GUN ON THE NYC SUBWAY. TWO NYPD COPS PICTURED ABOVE SURVEILLING LAW ABIDING PEOPLE ON THE SUBWAY UNDER THE GUISE OF CATCHING A FEW CRIMINALS. UNDER NY’s REVISED GUN LAW, POSSESSION OF A GUN oN ANY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS A CRIME. IN OTHER WORDS, CRIMINALS KNOW THAT IF THEY ROB SOMEONE ON THE SUBWAY or coming from the subway MOST LIKELY THE VICTIM WILL BE UNARMED. CONTRARY TO PROPAGHANDI CRIMINALS DON’T OBEY GUN LAWS, ONLY LAW ABIDING PEOPLE DO. IT ALSO MEANS CITIZENS HAVE NO 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHT TO CARRY A WEAPON TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IN CASE OF CONFRONTATION IF THEY USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN NYC (about 54% of the population). [MORE]

From [HERE] and [HERE] The New York City Police Department has undercover officers posing as Amazon and FedEx delivery workers in the subway system, citing “the unique environment and challenges presented in the New York City Transit system” as justification for the subterfuge. 

Photos surfaced online this week of two officers—identified by the badge necklaces they eventually revealed—at the Myrtle-Broadway subway station in Brooklyn. 

When asked about the photos, a spokesperson for NYPD told Motherboard via email, “Transit Officers conduct plainclothes patrols due to the unique environment and challenges presented in the New York City Transit system. These plain clothes officers concentrate their efforts on deterring criminal activity such as pick pockets and sexual offenders. The NYPD continues to conduct enhanced patrol deployments in the subway system and remains highly focused on the relatively small number of people responsible for much of New York City’s crime and disorder.”

Loyda Colon, a spokesperson for Communities United for Police Reform and Executive Director of the Justice Committee, told Motherboard via email, “These photos indicate a stunning abuse of public trust and a misuse of city money, and raises serious concerns about corporate-NYPD collaboration. Mayor Adams continues to pay lip service to community investments and police accountability, while pumping money into ineffective and abusive policing tactics that criminalize Black, Latinx and other New Yorkers of color. We need innovative approaches to public safety that are rooted in equity and prioritize ensuring all New Yorkers have what they need to thrive, not NYPD officers lurking in the subways disguised in Amazon, FedEx or other corporate uniforms to trick and arrest New Yorkers.”[MORE]

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COPS AND PEOPLE. No matter what costume these government employees put on they still retain their superhuman powers as representatives of authority. Unlike people, police officers have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on people. Cops can put their hands on you, not just in self-defense of themselves or self-defense of others, but they may do so offensively, initiate force against citizens to make stops, searches, arrests and deadly force whenever they deem it necessary. Individuals have no such rights and may only act in self-defense or in self-defense of others. Also, individuals are morally and legally required to comply with police orders and commands and have no right to even resist an unlawful arrest in most states. But, if citizens don’t have an individual right to initiate acts of violence then where did the police acquire their powers? All governmental power comes from the people right? We delegate our power as individuals to government representatives and employees to act on our behalf. And it goes without saying that people cannot delegate powers or rights that they don’t possess. We see then that the power to initiate acts of violence, the right to rule, is a superhuman power - not coming from individuals or a human source. The answer of course is that there is no such source of police power or the right to rule! There is no valid legal answer or lawful accounting for the basis of authority. The source of police and all government power is simply the belief people have in their minds. Authority is a belief, nothing more. Put on a costume and poof you’re in charge, take it off and you’re not in charge. The undeceiver Larken Rose observes,

“Despite all of the complex rituals and convoluted rationalizations, all modern belief in “government” rests on the notion that mere mortals can, through certain political procedures, bestow upon some people various rights which none of the people possessed to begin with. The inherent lunacy of such a notion should be obvious. There is no ritual or document through which any group of people can delegate to someone else a right which no one in the group possesses.‘

Unfortunately, unprovoked violence against others or the use of “force” is the basis of all social evils and can only be used in the sense of attack not defense. Rose explains, “The belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self- contradictory; it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed. Rather than being a force for order and justice, the belief in “authority” is the arch-enemy of humanity.”

Government “authority” can be summed up as the right to rule over people. It is the idea that some people have the moral right to forcibly control others, and that, consequently, those others have the moral obligation to obey.’ [MORE] FUNKTIONARY defines authority as ‘a cartoon, an alleged image of the Law or the notion of an implied right and application of that "right" of individuals or groups of same to control or exercise external power over others, which has no meaning in reality.’ FUNKTIONARY further states, authority is rule through coercion. The real threat to "authority" is the masses overcoming info-gaps and verigaps through self-knowledge and the proliferation of symbols of opposition, not crime or destruction of property.”

Authority is a “cartoon” or an “image of law” because “people cannot delegate rights they do not have, which makes it impossible for anyone to acquire the right to rule (”authority”). People cannot alter morality, which makes the “laws” of “government” devoid of any inherent “authority.” Ergo, “authority”-the right to rule-cannot logically exist. The concept itself is self-contradictory, like the concept of a “militant pacifist.” A human being cannot have superhuman rights, and therefore no one can have the inherent right to rule.’ [MORE]

The Charleena Lyles Niggarmarole: White Media/Prosecutors Knew "an Inquest" Wouldn’t Result in Charges for Killing Pregnant Black Woman. Under Wash Law Cops Can Only be Charged If they Acted w/Malice

The Associated Press reported, “An inquest jury found Wednesday that two Seattle police officers were justified in fatally shooting a mentally unstable, pregnant, Black mother of four children inside her apartment when she menaced them with knives in 2017.

The six King County coroner’s inquest jurors unanimously determined that officers Jason Anderson and Steven McNew, who are white, had no reasonable alternative to using deadly force. The findings drew an angry outburst from Charleena Lyles’ father, who shouted profanities and yelled, “You killed my daughter!” [MORE]

What massa media is not explaining is that an inquest is simply an administrative, fact-finding inquiry into the circumstances of a death. It is conducted by a County Coroner - not a court. No one can be found guilty or liable. [MORE] The inquest takes place before a panel (or jury) of 4 to 6 people and evidence is presented. At the end of the process the prosecutor still has discretion to file charges or not.

King County, Washington (which includes “progressive” Seattle) opted to make inquests mandatory in all deaths involving law enforcement - but it was really a way to pass the buck because prosecutions of police for killings in Washington never, ever occur. None are ever charged in Washington because in 1986, the state passed legislation saying officers cannot face prosecution for killing someone in the line of duty unless they acted with “malice” and “evil intent”. Wash. Rev. Code 9A.16.040 states:

(3) A public officer covered by subsection (1)(a) of this section shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force without malice and with a good faith belief that such act is justifiable pursuant to this section.

(4) A peace officer shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force in good faith, where "good faith" is an objective standard which shall consider all the facts, circumstances, and information known to the officer at the time to determine whether a similarly situated reasonable officer would have believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent death or serious physical harm to the officer or another individual.

Wash. Rev. Code 9A.16.040 Justifiable homicide or use of deadly force by public officer, peace officer, person aiding-Good faith standard (Revised Code of Washington (2022 Edition))

Wash. Rev. Code 9A.04.110 defines “malice” as

"Malice" and "maliciously" shall import an evil intent, wish, or design to vex, annoy, or injure another person. Malice may be inferred from an act done in willful disregard of the rights of another, or an act wrongfully done without just cause or excuse, or an act or omission of duty betraying a willful disregard of social duty;...

Wash. Rev. Code 9A.04.110 Definitions (Revised Code of Washington (2022 Edition))

Again, in Washington, police are never charged or convicted. Out of 213 police killings in a 10-year-period, only one officer was even charged, according to a Seattle Times investigation. “It’s the worst law in the nation,” said André Taylor, a police reform activist whose brother was killed by police last year. “It can embolden officers. They feel they have this special immunity. They don’t want to be responsible or accountable to nobody.” Taylor explained, the easiest way to get away with murder in Washington state is to put on a police uniform. [MORE]

And the white cops, prosecutors, coroners and media all knew the 2 white cops who murdered Charleena Lyles would never be charged. Nevertheless said white liberals went on and on about the above the meaningless bullshit inquest process. FUNKTIONARY describes such fuckery as hoaxing or The Niggarmarole, “an experience that you allow others to put you through when you think you’ve been left with nothing else to do. The only performance happening in a niggamarole is purely theatrical—all for show.”

Such is nature of the criminal justice in the lex-icon. That is, the legal system produces nothing but the appearance of justice. The [white] 'powers that be' go through great effort to produce this show of something called “fairness” and the court's emphasis on “procedural due process.” At the end of this Niggarmarole process people are exhausted or feel like they have had a substantive experience, like a dog chasing its tail or a heavy load of clothing run thru the laundry without soap. Said exhaustion makes you feel like you participated in democracy where none exists.

Pregnant Black mother of four children, Charleena Lyles, was shot and killed in her home by white police officers in 2017. In December 2021 the city of Seattle reached a settlement in the amount of $3.5 million in the late mother’s wrongful-death lawsuit.

According to the Seattle Times, the settlement was reached Monday (Nov. 30), voiding the need for a trial in February 2022.

After investigating itself, the Force Review Board, a panel of Seattle Police Department personnel, determined in a unanimous vote that the controversial shooting was consistent with police training. The analysis, released on December 8, 2017 details the factors considered for the vote, though it does not provide any recommendations to chance policy or training to prevent future incidents. [MORE]

Officers Jason Anderson and Steven McNew fired at Lyles, a 30-year-old mother of four, when she allegedly lunged at them with knives she had been concealing in her coat pockets. The pair had been responding to her 911 call about a burglary in her apartment. 

The interaction began calmly, as Lyles informed police of an open door and allegedly stolen Xbox.  Audio of the incident then turned to a child crying and Lyles cursing at the officers. Police reported that there were three children in the apartment.

After surveying Lyles’s home, Anderson and McNew were jotting down their report when she allegedly pulled out two knives and started to come at Anderson, who yelled for her to get back and pulled out his gun. The woman, who was 5-foot-3 and 100 pounds, then turned toward McNew. The officers told authorities McNew was trapped in a dead-end kitchen galley as she brandished the pair of knives in her hands. The white cops apparently are more than two times her size.

McNew told investigators he instructed Anderson to pull out a Taser, but he didn’t have it on him because its battery had died, the report said. As Lyles moved toward McNew, both officers independently decided to fire their guns—McNew fired three rounds and Anderson fired four.

Lyles fell to the ground and her infant child, who had been crawling around in the living room, climbed onto her back, while her toddler sat in the living room. She was later found to be 14 to 15 weeks pregnant.

McNew—who had a baton—told investigators he “didn’t feel there was any other reasonable alternative” to shooting Lyles and didn’t use his baton because there wasn’t enough space to properly use it.

Anderson said he wouldn’t have used his Taser even if he had it because he was trained to use lethal force when faced with a knife attack. He also had pepper spray on him, but said he didn’t employ it because it would be “tactically counterproductive” and could get in the officers’ eyes, opening them up to attack, the board found.

Lyles was documented for mental health issues that the officers were aware of before they shot her in the confines of her apartment kitchen. Seattle Times reports she had called Seattle police 23 times in the past 18 months before her death. [MORE]

TPD Releases Murder Video, Tries to Justify Shooting James Lowery in the back of the head as He Fled. He Didn’t Commit a Crime but He Met the Description: "Black Male, Jacket" [b/c any NGHR will do]

From [HERE] The Titusville Police Department (TPD) has released bodycam footage showing a foot pursuit that ended with the officer-involved shooting of James Lowery (video below).

Now-former Titusville Police Officer Joshua Payne, 29, is facing a manslaughter charge in connection with Lowery’s death.

The incident occurred as Officer Payne was responding to a report of a woman being violently assaulted on South Deleon Avenue on Dec. 26, 2021, WESHreported.

Officer Payne arrived at the scene and spotted a man who matched the suspect’s description fleeing the area on foot, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FLDE) said in a press release on June 1.

The man was later identified as 40-year-old Lowery, Spectrum News 13reported.

Officer Payne chased after him, firing his Taser multiple times to no avail, according to police.

Bodycam footage showed Officer Payne as he ordered Lowery to stop running and to stop reaching in his pockets. However, on video it doesn’t look like he is doing that.

“Drop it! Drop it! Drop it!” the officer ordered, just before Lowery appeared to try to climb over a fence, the video showed. Here, apparently he was referring to an imaginary gun - that he never saw.

Investigators later claimed the suspect tossed bags of illegal drugs away as he was fleeing.

Officer Payne told the seemingly-cornered suspect to “get down” and fired his Taser at him again, but Lowery was unaffected by the jolt.

Lowery kept attempting to flee and then turned away from the officer and hoisted himself over the fence, ignoring Officer Payne’s repeated commands to stop, the video showed.

The FLDE said Officer Payne, who was holding both his Taser and his duty weapon, then fired both weapons simultaneously, striking the suspect in the back of his head, Spectrum News 13 reported.

Lowery died at the scene.

Police claim Lowery threw an object and say that it turned out to be a “small bag of drugs,” WFTV reported. But people who commit murders, also might lie.

The FDLE handled the investigation into the fatal officer-involved shooting and submitted its findings to prosecutors on May 6.

Officer Payne was charged with manslaughter in connection with Lowery’s death.He turned himself in at the Brevard County Jail on June 1 and was later released on $15,000 bond.

Officer Payne was placed on unpaid leave from the TPD pending the outcome of an internal investigation, but he resigned from the force after he was criminally charged, WESH reported.

The TPD completed its internal investigation and released the bodycam footage on June 23.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is representing Lowery’s mother, Linda Johnson, said that Lowery had nothing to do with the domestic violence incident that led Officer Payne to respond to the area in the first place, WESH reported.

Investigators have confirmed that Lowery was not involved in the original call for service, WFTV reported.

“James Lowery wasn’t even the person 911 was called on,” Crump told reporters. “They shot the wrong black man.”

“A shot to the back of the head – nothing else needs to be said. That is unjustified,” Crump said. “You can’t justify shooting a man in the back of the head as he is running away from you.”

Titusville Police Chief John Lau said Officer Payne’s use of deadly force was not justified and that investigators believe the firearm discharge was accidental, WESH reported.

Chief Lau further noted that the officer violated multiple policies during the incident, to include having his firearm and his Taser out of their holsters at the same time.

“This was not a justified shooting. It was an accidental shooting with tragic results,” the chief said.

LOOKING FOR ALL BLACK MALES IN THE SYSTEM OF RACISM WHITE SUPREMACY, A MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON IN THE FREE RANGE PRISON SYSTEM

Chief Lau said that Lowery’s “decision to run away from Officer Payne and physically resist his lawful orders to stop also contributed to this incident,” Florida Today reported. Spoken like a true authoritarian, spouting ignorance to justify killing a Black man.

The Supreme Court has explained the use of deadly force to prevent escape is unconstitutional, at least in regard to white citizens that is. The Court has explained,

The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. 

A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead… Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. 

Tennessee v. Garner - 471 U.S. 1 at page 11 (1985).

Oklahoma Authoritarians are Scheduled to Commit 25 Murders between August 2022 and December 2024. Death Row (50% non-white) includes people w/mental illness, brain damage and innocence claims

From [DPIC] The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has set execution dates for 25 of the state’s 43 death-row prisoners, scheduling nearly an execution a month from August 2022 through December 2024. If carried out, the execution schedule, unprecedented in the state’s history, would put to death 58% of the state’s death row, including multiple prisoners with severe mental illness, brain damage, and claims of innocence. 

The court issued its execution schedule in two orders on July 1, 2022, in response to an application filed on June 10 by Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor. O’Connor sought the execution dates four days after Federal District Judge Stephen Friot denied a challenge to the constitutionality of the state’s lethal-injection protocol brought by 28 of the state’s death-row prisoners. Oklahoma uses a three-drug execution process that includes the controversial drug midazolam, which has been implicated in multiple botched executions. 

The state court’s execution orders came two weeks after the prisoners filed notice in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit that they intended to appeal Judge Friot’s ruling. Under the schedule, Oklahoma would begin to execute prisoners before the circuit court can rule on the prisoners’ appeal. The state previously executed four prisoners while the federal trial on the drug protocol was pending. 

The executions are set to take place in four phases of six executions each, plus an additional 25th execution. Within each phase, the executions are scheduled at four-week intervals, followed by an execution-free month before the start of the next phase. James Coddington is scheduled to be the first prisoner put to death, with an execution date of August 25, 2022. All prisoners facing execution in Oklahoma are afforded a clemency hearing within three weeks of their execution date. The Pardon and Parole Board, which has the responsibility to conduct those hearings, meets in public session only once each month and requested that it conduct no more than one clemency hearing per meeting.

Documentary, "The Viral Delusion." The Tragic Pseudoscience of SARS-CoV-2 & The Madness of Modern Virology (1-5)

From [HERE] The Untold Story Behind The Pandemic

The doctors, scientists and journalists featured in THE VIRAL DELUSION examine in detail the scientific papers that were used to justify the pandemic, and what they find is shattering. In this shocking, five-part, seven-hour documentary series, they explore every single major claim, from the “isolation” of the virus to its so-called genetic sequencing, from the discovery of how to “test” for SARS-CoV2 to the emergence of “variants” that in reality, they explain, exist only on a computer. Their point: is that the so-called SARS-CoV-2 virus exists only as a mental construct whose existence in the real world has been disproven by the science itself.

They then go back through history to reveal how the birth and growth of virology has led to massive misunderstanding and misdiagnosis of disease: from Smallpox to the Spanish Flu, Polio to AIDS, to COVID itself – putting the pandemic in a whole new context better understood not as settled science, but the tragic culmination of misunderstood biology by the growing cult of virology, built on pseudo-science, to which much of the rest of the medical profession defers without understanding or examination, and the tragic consequences that have been wrought in its name.

In 2019, the virologists took centre stage, and for the first time on film, their methods, miscues and tragedy they have wrought are put under the spotlight, revealing the extraordinary leaps of fantasy buried in their methodology, the contradictions quietly acknowledged in their papers, their desperate effort to change the language to justify their findings, the obvious incongruence of their conclusions and the extraordinary stakes for our entire society in whether we continue to blindly follow their lead into a full-scale war against nature itself.

Featuring: Andrew Kaufman, MD; Tom Cowan, MD; Stefan Lanka, Virologist; Torsten Engelbrecht, journalist; Claus Kohnlein, MD; Kevin Corbett, PhD RN; David Rasnick, Biochemist PhD; Mark Bailey, MD; Dawn Lester and David Parker, Authors; Stefano Scoglio, Biochemist PhD; Saeed Qureeshi, Chemist PhD; Celia Farber, Journalist; Harold Wallach, PhD; Pam Popper, PhD, ND; Charles Geshekter, PhD; Amandha Vollmer ND, Jim West, Author; Larry Palevsky MD; and more.

The opening episode, which is two hours and twenty minutes, will be available for free from March 21st until May 21st.

Government of Alberta Says the Leading Cause of Death in 2021 was ‘Unknown Causes’ and Reported a Surge in Deaths. Nearly All the Top Causes of Death Also are the Top Adverse Reactions to COVID Shots

From [HERE] Recent data on the leading causes of death in Alberta show a spike in the 2021 mortality rate due to “ill-defined and unknown causes.”

The data, published on June 30 by Service Alberta, ranks the 30 most common causes of death in the province last year.

For the first time in the past twenty years, the category of “ill-defined and unknown causes of mortality” was the number one cause of death in 2021, resulting in a total 3,362 deaths, up from 1,464 in 2020, and 522 the year before that.

The unknown cause of death category emerged on the list in 2019, previously it had not been included in the ranking list dating back to 2001.

Dr. Daniel Gregson, an associate professor specializing in infectious diseases and microbiology at the University of Calgary, told CTV News that the reasons behind the emergence of the unknown causes of death category last year are “probably multifactorial.”

He said those factors may include a lack of medical resources to determine the cause of death, delayed access to healthcare services, and post-COVID complications.

Identified cases of COVID-19 are ranked as the third leading cause of death in Alberta in 2021 with 1,950 deaths—a jump from 1,084 in 2020 when the pandemic began.

From 2015 to 2020, organic dementia was listed as the leading cause of death in Alberta with chronic ischemic heart disease the dominant cause from 2001 to 2014.

In 2021, organic dementia came in second, contributing to 2,135 deaths, while chronic ischemic heart disease ranked fourth with 1,939.

Among the other top causes of death listed were: malignant neoplasms of trachea, bronchus and lung (1,552), acute myocardial infarction (1,075), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (1,028), diabetes mellitus (728), stroke (612), and accidental poisoning by and exposure to drugs and other substances (604). [MORE]

2022 Genesis Prize was Awarded to Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla for His Effort to Create Human Dependency on Deadly "Vaccines" which cause the Undetected, Slow Motion Extermination of Undesired Populations

From [HERE] The Genesis Foundation announced in January that the winner of its annual prize for 2022 was Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer, which produced a COVID-19 vaccine that has been used by Israel and other countries around the world to inoculate their populations against the coronavirus.

The Genesis Prize honors individuals who serve as an inspiration to the next generation of Jews through their outstanding professional achievement and commitment to Jewish values and the Jewish people.

Bourla received the highest number of votes in a recent global vote in which more than 200,000 people from 71 countries participated. His nomination as prize laureate was then unanimously approved by the Genesis Foundation selection committee, the foundation said in a statement.

The committee commended Bourla “for his leadership, determination, and especially for his willingness to assume great risks.”

“Unlike CEOs of most other major companies working on developing COVID-19 vaccines, Dr. Bourla declined billions of dollars in US federal subsidies in order to avoid government bureaucracy and expedite development and production of the vaccine,” the statement said. “As a result, Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine was ready in record time: months instead of years.”

The foundation also noted “Dr. Bourla’s pride in his Jewish identity and heritage, his commitment to Jewish values and his support for the State of Israel.”

President Isaac Herzog will present Bourla with the $1 million prize at a ceremony in Israel to be held on June 29.

An Israeli health worker administers a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to a child at the Clalit Health Services in the central Israeli city of Modiin on January 2, 2022. (Photo by GIL COHEN-MAGEN / AFP)

Winners customarily donate the prize to a philanthropic cause and Bourla has asked that the money go toward preserving the memory of the victims of the Holocaust, “with a particular emphasis on the tragedy suffered by the Greek Jewish community,” the statement said.

Born in Thessaloniki, Greece, Bourla grew up as the child of Holocaust survivors.

“I did not set out to live a public life, and I never could have imagined that I might one day receive the profound honor of the Genesis Prize and stand alongside my extraordinary fellow nominees,” Bourla was quoted as saying in the statement. “I accept it humbly and on behalf of all my Pfizer colleagues who answered the urgent call of history these past two years and together bent the arc of our common destiny.”

“I was brought up in a Jewish family who believed that each of us is only as strong as the bonds of our community; and that we are all called upon by God to repair the world,” Bourla said, referring to a central tenet in Judaism of perfecting the world. “I look forward to being in Jerusalem to accept this honor in person, which symbolizes the triumph of science and a great hope for our future.”

The prize is usually awarded in Jerusalem each June at a dinner attended by the prime minister. But the ceremony has been called off the past two years due to the pandemic.

Genesis Foundation CEO Stan Polovets praised Bourla, saying he “personifies two of the most fundamental Jewish values: the commitment to the sanctity of life and to repairing the world.”

“Millions of people are alive and healthy because of what Dr. Bourla and his team at Pfizer have accomplished,” Polovets said, adding that it was a “proud moment not just for the winner but for the entire Jewish community.

“A people so small in number are having such an outsized impact on this global effort to save lives,” Polovets said.

Other candidates on a short list to win the prize, often referred to as the “Jewish Noble,” were actor, producer, director and activist Sacha Baron Cohen; fashion designer Diane von Furstenberg; philosopher and author Yuval Noah Harari; actress and activist Scarlett Johansson; and human rights activist and Nazi-hunter Serge Klarsfeld.

Previous winners of the Genesis Prize include artist Anish Kapoor, violinist Itzhak Perlman, former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg and actor-director Michael Douglas. In 2018, US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg received a lifetime achievement award from the foundation. [MORE]

Massive 2022 Drop In Births: Germany -14%, Greece -12%, Hungary & Finland -11%, UK -9% & Much More

Official Government Reports, Confidential Pfizer Documents & the Cost of Living Crisis Prove Your Government is Trying to Kill you and Depopulate the Planet

From [EXPOSE] In 1993 a book was published by a former spy of the MI6 named Dr John Coleman. In that book, Dr Coleman wrote the following – 

“At least 4 billion “useless eaters” shall be eliminated by the year 2050 by means of limited wars, organized epidemics of fatal rapid-acting diseases and starvation. Energy, food and water shall be kept at subsistence levels for the non-elite, starting with the White populations of Western Europe and North America and then spreading to other races. 

The population of Canada, Western Europe and the United States will be decimated more rapidly than on other continents, until the world’s population reaches a manageable level of 1 billion, of which 500 million will consist of Chinese and Japanese races, selected because they are people who have been regimented for centuries and who are accustomed to obeying authority without question.”

Many people would most likely disregard the above claims as “tinfoil hat nonsense”. 

But unfortunately, official Government data, confidential Pfizer documents, and real-world events such as the current cost of living crisis, the alleged impending climate change disaster, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the ongoing development of Artificial Intelligence, strongly suggest that there exists an agenda to depopulate the world, and your Government is, in essence, attempting to kill you.

We are now living in a world where Governments and Institiutions are telling us we are in a race to to prevent a “disastrous” increase in global temperatures due to greenhouse gas emissions. 

The vast majority of those greenhouse gas emissions are Carbon dioxide (CO2). A gas that every single human being on the planet produces every single time they exhale. 

In one day, the average person breathes out around 500 litres of the greenhouse gas CO2 – which amounts to around 1kg in mass. 

This doesn’t sound much until you take into account the fact that the world’s population is around 6.8 billion, collectively breathing out around 2500 million tonnes of the stuff each year – which is around 7% of the annual CO2 tonnage churned out by the burning of fossil fuel around the world.

Therefore, if we’re to believe the tightly controlled and censored narrative around climate change, human beings are one of the biggest contributors to it by simply just being alive. 

So, therefore, if the “elite” wanted to save the planet, a good start would be to reduce the world’s population which would, in turn, reduce the carbon dioxide produced naturally by humans breathing, and reduce the amount of fossil fuels required to sustain a person’s quality of life. 

But what if we’re being lied to about the impending climate change doom that now litters every News channel? Why would the so-called “elite” be so eager to reduce the world’s population then?

Well, we only need to look to the advancement of technology and Artificial Intelligence to realise that humans aren’t really needed as much as they used to be in order to keep the rich, rich. And pretty soon they may no longer be needed at all. 

If you can’t see that you pretty much living in a slave system designed to keep the rich, rich and the poor, poor, then you’ve been living your life with your head in the sand. 

Nobody ever gets rich working 9 to 5, but millions are trained to believe that this is what you should aim to do when you grow up. Granted, you can start your own business and have others slave away for you, but even then the “taxman” comes to make sure you have to keep up the endless routine of sleep, work, repeat for another year. Or if you’re extremely successful one of the large corporations will come knocking to buy you out. 

The system is rigged.

Another example is how no matter how much your earnings increase throughout the years, your outgoings will remain relative to or surpass that increase. 

Take the cost of a house for example. For most people, the mortgage or rent alone will take a huge chunk of their wages, and it’s a cost that rises by the year. Is it because houses actually cost that much? Or is it because the system’s designed to ensure that most will never be able to break free from the life of slavery they have been indoctrinated to accept?

For centuries the “elite” have needed you to accept and remain trapped in the system to essentially make them rich. But now they don’t need you, because they have developed technology, robotics and Artificial Intelligence that can do the job for them, and this technology is now more advanced than most people realise. 

One day soon there will be no jobs for millions of people. In effect rendering millions to be known as “useless eaters”. 

This means the world is at a crossroads, and the elite has two choices. They sustain millions or even billions of people with financial support and help to ensure they survive and live quality lives. Or, they set about to depopulate the world.

Unfortunately, evidence suggests they chose the depopulation route a while ago, and their plan to do so is already in motion. 

Here are just a few of the things the “elite” have done and are doing in order to depopulate the world. 

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Killing the Elderly & Vulnerable

In March 2020 the British people were told that they must “stay at home” in order to “protect the NHS” and “save lives”. They were also told that the authorities needed just “three weeks to flatten the curve”. This was allegedly because of the threat of a new and emerging virus which we’re told originated in the city of Wuhan, China.

But evidence suggests the Covid-19 pandemic was in fact an exaggerated lie. A lie that involved prematurely ending the lives of thousands upon thousands of people, who you were told died of Covid-19. A lie that has involved committing one of the greatest crimes against humanity in living memory. A lie that has required three things – fear, your compliance, and a drug known as Midazolam.

Serious illness in Covid-19 allegedly presents pneumonia and accompanying respiratory insufficiency. Therefore typical symptoms include breathlessness, cough, weakness and fever. We’re also told that people who suffer deteriorating respiratory failure and who do not receive intensive care, develop acute respiratory distress syndrome with severe breathlessness.

While midazolam (think diazepam on steroids) can cause serious or life-threatening breathing problems such as shallow, slowed, or temporarily stopped breathing that may lead to permanent brain injury or death.

UK regulators state that you should only receive midazolam in a hospital or doctor’s office that has the equipment that is needed to monitor your heart and lungs and to provide life-saving medical treatment quickly if your breathing slows or stops.

Knowing that would you use midazolam to treat people who were suffering pneumonia and respiratory insufficiency allegedly due to Covid-19?

Because that’s precisely what they did in the UK, and they administered it by the truckload in care homes. 

In March 2020, the UK Department of Health & Social Care purchased a two-year supply of midazolam and was looking to purchase more (source). And they certainly made use of it.

According to official data in April 2019 up to 21,977 prescriptions for Midazolam were issued, containing 171,952 items, the vast majority being Midazolam Hydrochloride. However in April 2020 45,033 prescriptions for Midazolam were issued, containing 333,229 items, the vast majority being Midazolam Hydrochloride. 

That is a 104.91% increase in the number of prescriptions issued for Midazolam and a 93.85% increase in the number of items they contained. 

But these weren’t issued in hospitals, they were issued by GP practices. This means they were administered to the elderly and vulnerable who had been released from hospital under the instruction of then Health Secretary Matt Hancock and into understaffed and overwhelmed care homes. 

According to the UK’s Office for National Statistics, three in every five Covid-19 deaths occurred in those who suffered learning difficulties and disabilities (see here).

Do you really believe there’s a virus so clever that it knows to only kill people who are disabled or have learning difficulties?

In relation to deaths of people with learning difficulties the ONS said – ‘the largest effect was associated with living in a care home or other communal establishment.‘

Having a learning difficulty and being in care doesn’t mean you are more likely to die of Covid-19. What it means is that you are much more likely to have a DNR order placed on you without informing yourself or your family, which Carers / NHS staff then use as permission to put you on end-of-life care, which involves the administration of Midazolam.

The evidence for this is vast, and you can read a full investigation exposing the Midazolam scandal in the UK here. 

Covid-19 Vaccination: Infertility & Genocide

Covid-19 vaccination is going to lead mass depopulation on top of the thousands it has already killed. 

The latest reports released by medicine regulators around the world reveal that there have been at least 7.3 million injuries reported as adverse reactions to the Covid-19 injections up to late May and early June 2022, including 77,068 deaths (source).

However, these horrific figures do not illustrate the true nature of the consequences of Covid-19 vaccination because it is estimated by medicine regulators that just 1 to 10% of adverse events are actually reported.

But something much more sinister is occurring with these experimental injections, and the evidence can all be found in both official Government data and the confidential documents the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) attempted to delay publishing by 75 years but has been forced to publish by court order. 

In early January 2022, Federal Judge Mark Pittman ordered the FDA to release 55,000 pages per month. They released 12,000 pages by the end of January.

Since then, PHMPT has posted all of the documents on its website. The latest drop happened on 1stJune 2022.

One of the documents contained in the data dump is ‘reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf’. Page 12 of the confidential document contains data on the use of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection in pregnancy and lactation.

Confidential Pfizer Documents reveal 90% of Covid Vaccinated Pregnant Women lost their Baby

Pfizer state in the document that by 28th February 2021 there were 270 known cases of exposure to the mRNA injection during pregnancy.

Forty-six percent of the mothers (124) exposed to the Pfizer Covid-19 injection suffered an adverse reaction.

Of those 124 mothers suffering an adverse reaction, 49 were considered non-serious adverse reactions, whereas 75 were considered serious. This means 58% of the mothers who reported suffering adverse reactions suffered a serious adverse event ranging from uterine contraction to foetal death.

There were 34 outcomes altogether at the time of the report, but 5 of them were still pending. Pfizer note that only 1 of the 29 known outcomes were normal, whilst 28 of the 29 outcomes resulted in the loss/death of the baby. This equates to 97% of all known outcomes of Covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy resulting in the loss of the child.

When we include the 5 cases where the outcome was still pending it equates to 82% of all outcomes of Covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy resulting in the loss of the child. This equates to an average of around 90% between the 82% and 97% figure.[MORE]

Puppetician Biden Pledges $9B More to Pfizer for COVID Shots. All Doses Continue to be Distributed as Emergency Use (Not FDA Approved) Enabling Legal Immunity for Any Injury Caused by the Injections

The federal government has given complete immunity to Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J for any injury caused by their Covid-19 vaccines.  That’s right: you cannot sue them if you are injured by their Covid-19 vaccine.  (See Note 1 to read the law yourself.)  So, while their product may not give you immunity, Pfizer and Moderna are guaranteed immunity.  Said immunity also shields doctors, hospitals and any other persons who administer or coerce people to take deadly COVID injections.

And it gets even worse.  These companies are even immune for – hold your breath – willful misconduct.  That may sound crazy, but it is shockingly true.  You can only sue them for willful misconduct if the federal government first sues them for such conduct.  (See Note 2 below to read the law yourself.)  And what are the odds the federal government will do so after wildly promoting the vaccine?  About as likely as the FDA ever admitting they promoted a vaccine that caused widespread harm. [MORE]

From [HERE] Is there any more doubt that the COVID-19 plandemic, which was used to transfer America’s wealth to Big Pharma with literally TRILLIONS of taxpayer funds transferred into their accounts, has now allowed Pfizer to have complete control of the country by buying the White House and President of the United States?

It began with fellow billionaire Donald Trump, of course, in 2020 who strong-armed the FDA into giving fast-track emergency use authorization to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

Then Biden was installed as President and kept the coffers full, and now that 80% of Americans have already received a COVID-19 vaccine and demand is waning, with 98 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine currently sitting unused due to lack of demand, the call was put in to Joe this week to keep the faucet running, and the White House obliged and pledged another $9 BILLION for 300 million more doses of the deadly COVID-19 shots.

Trump and Biden might disagree on a lot of things, but Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines ain’t one of them. (Bitchute channel.)

The top three firms who hold the most stock in Pfizer are Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street (source), and there probably are very few investment firms who do NOT own some Pfizer stock, so when you see officials with the FDA, CDC, and others promoting Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, they are probably all shareholders and cashing in, as are most members of Congress (unfortunately, these records at opensecrets.org only go through 2018; it would be interesting to see from 2020 and later.)

Pfizer is already swimming in record profits, but that hasn’t stopped the drug company from gouging the American taxpayer for every last dollar.

On Wednesday, the Biden Administration signed off on a new vaccine supply deal with Pfizer for $3.2 billion for 105 million COVID injections, but that’s only for the first batch of mRNA shots. The contract will generate well over $9 billion for Pfizer, as this latest purchase agreement tops off at 300 million doses. Compared to previous settlements with Pfizer, this public-private no-bid arrangement will come at a much higher cost to the U.S. taxpayer.

The Biden Administration has justified the deal by claiming that it needs to restock supply to prepare for seasonal spikes. The data does not support such a claim. According to the CDC, almost 100 million taxpayer-funded Pfizer shots (and 169 million total shots) have gone unused, resulting in billions of dollars in waste.

The new arrangement allows for the Biden Administration to buy Pfizer’s authorization-pending COVID injections, which the company claims is reformulated for newer variants.

However, even the new formulation is already outdated. It was designed and trialed for an Omicron subvariant (BA.1) that was popular last Winter, but no longer exists in circulation, potentially rendering it just as useless as the Wuhan strain shot. The deal includes the infant and toddler formulations, which are based on the non-existent Wuhan strain.

None of the shots for this deal will be supplied under an FDA approved label. Instead, they will be distributed under emergency use authorization (EUA). Pfizer has never deployed its FDA-approved vaccine in the United States. The company recently acknowledged that it never intends on producing its original FDA approved vaccines.

The original deal with Pfizer was negotiated by the Trump Administration during the days of Operation Warpspeed. It paid the pharma giant $19.50 a dose. The new pact gives Pfizer $30.48 per dose, resulting in an astronomical 56% hike from the deal negotiated by the last administration.

The price hike conflicts with the probability that Pfizer’s costs are likely much lower than they were with the original purchase order. The infant and child shots have a fraction of the active agreement as the adult supply, and each vial stores more doses . Moreover, Pfizer has added an ingredient to the formula that allows for a significant shelf life extension, making the logistics much more cost effective.

Pfizer’s margins were already through the roof prior to the Wednesday announcement.

Pfizer’s May earnings report showed that the company logged a record breaking $26 billion in Q1 sales, marking a quarterly profit of $7.86 billion. Revenue was up 77% from 2021, while profit was up 61%. Now absorb these 2022 numbers in the context of Pfizer’s 2021 revenue outperforming its 2020 revenue by 95%.

Before the new vaccine purchase order, Pfizer was already on track to bring in over $100 billion in revenue and $32 billion in net income this year. In financial statements, the company has acknowledged that it has transformed itself into a COVID-19-driven business. All of its new income is coming from the American taxpayer and other government “customers” via their taxpayers, who have virtually no say in the matter. [MORE]

As Gas Prices Soar Biden Sent 5M Barrels of Oil from US Strategic Petroleum Reserves to China (other places) at No Cost. Dems Use the Jan 6th Unarmed, HonkeyKong Misdemeanor Insurrection to Distract

OVER PLAYING THEIR HAND. How many neuropeons were armed?? Nearly all charged with misdemeanors, such as trespass or disorderly. [MORE] One person died inside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 — Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt. Despite being unarmed and presenting no physical threat to anyone, she was shot dead by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd. Fake news reports claimed that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was killed by rioters wielding a fire extinguisher. However, as George Parry reported at TheAmerican Spectator, Sicknick died on Jan. 7 of a stroke. The medical examiner found no evidence of physical trauma. Kevin Greeson, Benjamin Phillips, and Roseanne Boyland were all protesters who died outside of the Capitol building pursuant to ongoing health issues. [MORE]

From [HERE] More than 5 million barrels of oil that were part of a historic U.S. emergency reserves release to lower domestic fuel prices were exported to Europe and Asia last month, according to data and sources, even as U.S. gasoline and diesel prices hit record highs.

The export of crude and fuel is blunting the impact of the moves by U.S. President Joe Biden to lower record pump prices. Biden on Saturday renewed a call for gasoline suppliers to cut their prices, drawing criticism from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.

About 1 million barrels per day is being released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) through October. The flow is draining the SPR, which last month fell to the lowest since 1986. U.S. crude futures are above $100 per barrel and gasoline and diesel prices above $5 a gallon in one-fifth of the nation. U.S. officials have said oil prices could be higher if the SPR had not been tapped.

"The SPR remains a critical energy security tool to address global crude oil supply disruptions," a Department of Energy spokesperson said, adding that the emergency releases helped ensure stable supply of crude oil.

The fourth-largest U.S. oil refiner, Phillips 66 (PSX.N), shipped about 470,000 barrels of sour crude from the Big Hill SPR storage site in Texas to Trieste, Italy, according to U.S. Customs data. Trieste is home to a pipeline that sends oil to refineries in central Europe.

Atlantic Trading & Marketing (ATMI), an arm of French oil major TotalEnergies (TTEF.PA), exported 2 cargoes of 560,000 barrels each, the data showed.

Phillips 66 declined to comment on trading activity. ATMI did not respond to a request for comment.

Cargoes of SPR crude were also headed to the Netherlands and to a Reliance (RELI.NS) refinery in India, an industry source said. A third cargo headed to China, another source said.

At least one cargo of crude from the West Hackberry SPR site in Louisiana was set to be exported in July, a shipping source added.

"Crude and fuel prices would likely be higher if (the SPR releases) hadn't happened, but at the same time, it isn't really having the effect that was assumed," said Matt Smith, lead oil analyst at Kpler.

The latest exports follow three vessels that carried SPR crude to Europe in April helping replace Russian crude supplies. read more

U.S. crude inventories are the lowest since 2004 as refineries run near peak levels. Refineries in the U.S. Gulf coast were at 97.9% utilization, the most in three and a half years.

The Second Scramble for Africa Under the Guise of “Conservation”

How the International Union for Conservation of Nature Congress continues be a farce, and perpetuates a fake conservation in Africa: basically the interests are just commerce. From [HERE] The International Union for Conservation of Nature Congress in September 2021 was a key platform for the elaboration of the European Union’s NaturAfrica plan, which aims to build on the contentious conservancy model of conservation in 31 African states. Mordecai Ogada reflects on his experiences at the congress, and whether Africa’s “… heritage salesmen and saleswomen are facilitating the second scramble for Africa delivered in the guise of conservation.”

Dear natives, do you know any conservationist who was in Marseille, France, in the last couple of weeks? If you’re a conscious African citizen, you need to ask them exactly what they were doing there and what they discussed at the IUCN World Conservation Congress. Personally, I was there as part of a group organizing resistance against the relentless advance of colonialism throughout the global South under the guise of conservation. Like most conservation conferences today, this meeting was full of backslapping and self-congratulatory nonsense exchanged between celebrities, politicians and business people. This is the ultimate irony because this is the group of people most responsible for the consumption patterns that have landed the world in the climate predicament we’re in today.

They created the most effective filter to keep out people from the global South (where most biodiversity exists), the students who may be learning new scientific lessons on conservation, and the independent-minded practitioners who would be there to share their views, rather than show their faces, flaunt their status and prostitute their credentials for the benefit of their benefactors. This filter was the registration fee. The cheapest rate was the “special members fee” which was 780 Euros.

While most of the Kenyan conservationists are now back from Marseille gushing about the beauty of the South of France (which is true), I come back home a worried man, even more perturbed than I was before about the march of colonialism under the guise of conservation. For any African proud of their heritage, this worry is heightened by the unending queue of Home Guards and Uncle Toms lining up to sing for the crumbs and leftovers from Massa’s table: the small jobs, big cars and trips to conferences where the only thing prominent about them is their dark complexion and not the intellectual content of their contributions. These heritage salesmen and saleswomen give themselves all sorts of fancy titles, but their brains are of no consequence to the European colonizers. They are as much props as the obviously (physically, mentally, both?) uncomfortable woman unfortunate (or foolish?) enough to have her ridiculous image carrying a pangolin used on the blueprint for the new Scramble for Africa.

The biggest thing out of Marseille was the European Union’s grand plan to capture Africa’s natural heritage through a program called NaturAfrica. Since they know that they have selected partners in Africa to whom prostitution comes easily, they drowned the announcement in noise about doubling of funding for conservation on Twitter.

In the first photo above, you can see the EU’s Philippe Mayaux presenting the audacious grand plan. He expressly stated that they are going to use the “Northern Rangelands Trust model” which has served them well thus far. I’ve been saying for the last 5 years that NRT is a model for colonialism and some invertebrates here have been breaking wind in consternation at my disrespect for their cult. The financiers have now said that it is a pilot for their planned acquisition of Africa’s natural heritage. What say you now? Who’s in charge of the plantation? Do the naïve majority now understand the violence in northern Kenya? Do the naïve majority now understand why foreign special forces are training armed personnel (outside our state security organs) to guard the so-called conservancies?

Following this extravagant declaration by Mayaux, the CEO of the NRT, Tom Lalampaa, barely containing his joy, took to the podium and gushed that “NaturAfrica will be welcomed by all Africans.” Only the irrational excitement brought on by Massa’s praises can cause a mere NGO director to purport to speak for the 1.3 billion inhabitants of the world’s second largest continent. Kwenda huko! Get out of here! We can see through the scheme!

On the map presented by Mayeux, youcan see the takeover plan (the dark green areas); Tsavo, Amboseli and Mkomazi in northern Tanzania is a colony of the WWF “Unganisha” program. To the west is The Nature Conservancy colony consisting of the Maasai Mara Wildlife Conservancies Association in Kenya, and the northern Tanzania Rangelands Initiative. The rest are the NRT colony (including the Rift Valley, which is clearly marked) and the oil fields in northern Kenya. East Africa’s entire Indian Ocean seascape is marked for acquisition; spare a thought for the island nations therein, because they have been swallowed whole. The plan has already been implemented around the Seychelles and documented.

I will repeat this as often as necessary: the biggest threat to the rights and sovereignty of African peoples in the 21st century is not military conflict, terrorism, disease, hunger, etc. It is organizations and governments that seek to dominate us through conservation. They will bring their expatriates, their militaries, and their policies. If you look at the map, the relatively “free” countries—like Nigeria, Congo, Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia, etc.—are those where international conservation NGOs haven’t been able to get a foothold. Here in Kenya, our state agency, the Kenya Wildlife Services, is busy counting animals, not knowing that it is well on the way to becoming an irrelevant spectator in our conservation arena. If you think this is far-fetched, ask someone there why there are radioactive materials dumped by the Naro Moru gate to Mt. Kenya National Park. Or why the Kenya Forest Service is standing by without any policy position while the Rhino Ark goes on about fencing Mt. Kenya Forest, a UNESCO world heritage site. [MORE]

Western Nonprofits are Trampling Over Africans’ Rights and Land Indigenous People are Being Forced Out from so-called Protected Areas

From [HERE] The accelerating deterioration of the natural environment has manifested in devastating loss of biodiversity and extreme weather events posing existential threats to our world. As a concerted effort to address the twin issues of climate change and biodiversity loss, climate scientists and conservationists are advocating to double the coverage of protected areas by setting aside at least 30 percent of terrestrial cover for conservation by 2030.

The plan, known as Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, was initially proposed by Western non-profit conservation organizations, pushed by corporate donors, and supported by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Indigenous and human rights activists, however, are sounding the alarm, noting that the plan would further dispossess Indigenous lands for commodification under the guise of conservation. They are comparing the so-called 30×30 plan to the second scramble for Africa and a “colossal land grab as big as Europe’s colonial era” that will “bring as much suffering and death.”

Protected areas are all the national parks, game reserves, forest reserves, and myriad other places and spaces where states evict their original inhabitants to provide special protection from human interference. They already cover 15.73 percent of the world terrestrial surface—and two-thirds of that is within the global south. Within Africa, countries such as the Republic of Congo, Namibia, Tanzania, Zambia, and Guinea have each set aside between 36 to 42 percent of their national territories exclusively for wildlife and biodiversity conservation compared to nearly 13 percent in the United States.

Political ecologists Dan Brockington and Rosaleen Duffy point out that the most dramatic growth of protected areas in Africa was between 1985 and 1995, which coincides with the continent’s wave of global neoliberal economic policies. During that period, powerful institutions, notably the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, imposed structural adjustment plans all meant to reduce the power, reach, and interference of government and give industry greater freedom and less red tape surrounding natural resource use. As such, protected areas became a means to deliver, under coercive pressure, economic development through wildlife conservation and tourism that significantly contributed to the national economy.