Great Reset
The US government’s ‘psychopathic’ record on bioweapons should give us pause about ‘bird flu’ claims
From LifeSiteNews
Farmers and citizens around the world must resist dangerous animal cullings and put governments on the defensive about the new ‘bird flu’ scare, given what we know about the abuse of bioweapons and gain-of-function research.
In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, medical science author Kris Newby told the story of how she learned that what is known as Lyme disease is likely the product of a bioweapon. She dropped fascinating discoveries that helped lead her to this conclusion: The admissions of a CIA “black ops guy” to dropping poison ticks on Cubans and of a bioweapons contractor to mass producing fleas, ticks, and mosquitoes “weaponized” with “deadly or incapacitating” diseases.
The importance of this interview goes far beyond the question of whether Lyme disease is a bioweapon, for which she provided hard-to-ignore evidence. By giving a disturbing glimpse into U.S. military involvement in disease bioweapons, it steers even the “conspiracy skeptic” to admit to the possibility, or likelihood, that governments, including our own, continue to test and deploy such bioweapons.
One who is unafraid of facing facts and reason will come to the same conclusion as Stanford professor Jay Bhattacharya upon reviewing Newby’s research: That the “mid-20th century US biomedical research establishment was psychopathic,” as shown by its knowingly “deadly investigations in the name of developing vaccines and bioweapons.”
But human nature doesn’t change, and if the biomedical establishment had psychopathic tendencies less than a century ago, there will be people within it with those same tendencies today, as Bhattacharya concludes, pointing out that this “may help explain many things about the COVID pandemic.”
This question of government involvement in bioweapons production is taking on fresh and urgent relevance as the WHO redoubles its efforts to pass a freedom-restricting, national sovereignty-overriding Pandemic Treaty and as a bird flu scare is emerging.
Despite the fact that evidence overwhelmingly shows COVID-19 was a gain-of-function bioweapon used as an excuse to push harmful “vaccinations” around the world, the public is expected to unquestioningly swallow the idea that there is no agenda or deliberation behind a bird flu outbreak. Moreover, we are to believe bird flu is such a threat that it necessitates the mass culling of millions of chickens, severely restricting our food supply.
Already, there are plans to kill over four million chickens in Iowa after the avian influenza was reportedly detected among a flock in Sioux County. A leaked Zoom meeting involving Canada’s chief public health officer, Theresa Tam, shows a government team discussing measures it can take to curb or prevent potential outbreaks in Canada: searching farms for positive bird flu cases in animals and quarantining those farms; surveillance and tracking of infection cases; honing in on the production of raw milk; and even searching for infection in “farm cats,” which they acknowledged is a delicate endeavor, since they are cherished as pets.
In a recent interview with Alex Jones, Dr. Peter McCullough warned that PCR testing animals for bird flu is only going to “create a false case count” as well as “orders for mass culling.”
“I don’t think this is a threat to mankind. I think this is a giant threat to the food supply because of this elective mass destruction of livestock,” said Dr. McCullough, who went on to suggest that the animals ride out the infections without being killed by the masses. He also called for an investigation into gain-of-function research, suggesting that this bird flu, like COVID-19, may be the result of such research.
Remarkably, the scientist Dr. Michael Gregor, a vegan who once once testified on behalf of Oprah Winfrey in her “meat defamation” trial, has repeatedly claimed that chicken farms will trigger an apocalyptic virus that will threaten half of humankind. In 2006, he published a book called Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching, in which he warns that “leading public health authorities now predict as inevitable a pandemic of influenza, triggered by bird flu and expected to lead to millions of deaths around the globe.”
In his 2020 book “How to Survive a Pandemic,” he recommends that humans eventually not eat poultry at all, asserting, “As long as there is poultry, there will be pandemics. In the end, it may be us or them.”
In fact, one Amazon book reviewer believes his title is a misnomer and should be replaced with the following: “How Raising and Consuming Animal Flesh Causes Pandemics, and (By the Way) How to Survive One.”
In other words, in order to avoid total apocalypse, humanity must face economic devastation as well as likely malnutrition and health deficits from the inability to consume animal flesh. Globalists including the World Economic Forum (WEF) and Bill Gates already want the world to transition to synthetic beef “for the climate.” Are we to believe that eliminating animal flesh, a staple of human diets going back thousands of years, is genuinely good for the welfare of mankind?
Targeting chickens also conveniently aims a blow at those who are seeking to opt out of the globalist system by producing their own food, especially since the most accessible source of animal protein is chicken eggs and meat, available even to non-farmers.
The globalists, however – pardon the pun – prefer to kill two birds with one stone. A bird flu outbreak could accomplish another major destructive goal of the globalists: Dr. McCullough thinks that the “end game” of this bird flu is “mass vaccination.” He pointed out that the military contractor Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) has already helped develop a bird flu vaccine which has been cleared by the FDA, and on Thursday, it was reported that the U.S. government is close to an “agreement to fund a late-stage trial of Moderna’s mRNA bird flu vaccine.”
Farmers and citizens around the world must resist mass animal cullings and put governments on the defensive, in light of what we know about the abuse of bioweapons and gain-of-function research. We have every right to question the origins and true danger of a new “pandemic,” considering what we’ve learned and witnessed during the COVID-19 outbreak. We cannot let globalists destroy lives in the name of saving them.
From LifeSiteNews
Even happy, healthy lives without major issues can warrant needless ending if they are ‘complete.’
Notorious secular “ethicist” Peter Singer has co-authored an opinion piece in The New York Times positing a chilling new rationale for assisted suicide: the determination that one’s life is simply “complete.”
Princeton psychologist Daniel Kahneman died in March 2024 at age 90. His cause of death was not disclosed at the time, but a year later, The Wall Street Journal revealed that Kahneman had emailed friends the day before to tell them he was traveling to Switzerland to avail himself of the country’s legal physician-assisted suicide.
“I think Danny wanted, above all, to avoid a long decline, to go out on his terms, to own his own death,” WSJ journalist and longtime friend of the deceased Jason Zweig wrote. “Maybe the principles of good decision-making that he had so long espoused — rely on data, don’t trust most intuitions, view the evidence in the broadest possible perspective — had little to do with his decision.”
On April 14, The New York Times published a guest essay by the infamous Singer, a pro-infanticide Princeton bioethics professor, and philosophy professor Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek, who shared that they too knew of Kahneman’s plans and that days before he had told them, “I feel I’ve lived my life well, but it’s a feeling. I’m just reasonably happy with what I’ve done. I would say if there is an objective point of view, then I’m totally irrelevant to it. If you look at the universe and the complexity of the universe, what I do with my day cannot be relevant.”
“I have believed since I was a teenager that the miseries and indignities of the last years of life are superfluous, and I am acting on that belief,” Kahneman reportedly said. “I am still active, enjoying many things in life (except the daily news) and will die a happy man. But my kidneys are on their last legs, the frequency of mental lapses is increasing, and I am 90 years old. It is time to go.”
Singer and de Lazari-Radek argued that this was an eminently reasonable conclusion. “(I)f, after careful reflection, you decide that your life is complete and remain firmly of that view for some time, you are the best judge of what is good for you,” they wrote. “This is especially clear in the case of people who are at an age at which they cannot hope for improvement in their quality of life.”
“(I)f we are to live well to the end, we need to be able to freely discuss when a life is complete, without shame or taboo,” the authors added. “Such a discussion may help people to know what they really want. We may regret their decisions, but we should respect their choices and allow them to end their lives with dignity.”
Pro-lifers have long warned that the euthanasia movement devalues life and preys on the ill and distraught by making serious medical issues (even non-terminal ones) into grounds to end one’s life. But Singer and de Lazari-Radek’s essay marks a new extreme beyond that point by asserting that even happy, healthy lives without major issues can warrant needless ending.
“Instead of seeing every human life as having inherent value and dignity, Singer sees life as transactional: something you are allowed to keep by being happy, able-bodied, and productive — and something to be taken away if you are not,” Cassy Cooke wrote at Live Action News.
In America, nine states plus the District of Columbia currently allow assisted suicide. In March, Delaware took a step closer to becoming the 10th with its own legalization bill, although it has yet to become law. Another bill recently failed in Maryland.
Support is available to talk those struggling with suicidal thoughts out of ending their lives. The Suicide & Crisis Lifeline can be reached by calling or texting 988.
From LifeSiteNews
Schwab’s World Economic Forum became a globalist hub for population control, radical climate agenda, and transhuman ideology under his decades-long leadership.
Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum and the face of the NGO’s elitist annual get-together in Davos, Switzerland, has resigned as chair of WEF.
Over the decades, but especially over the past several years, the WEF’s Davos annual symposium has become a lightning rod for conservative criticism due to the agendas being pushed there by the elites. As the Associated Press noted:
Widely regarded as a cheerleader for globalization, the WEF’s Davos gathering has in recent years drawn criticism from opponents on both left and right as an elitist talking shop detached from lives of ordinary people.
While WEF itself had no formal power, the annual Davos meeting brought together many of the world’s wealthiest and most influential figures, contributing to Schwab’s personal worth and influence.
Schwab’s resignation on April 20 was announced by the Geneva-based WEF on April 21, but did not indicate why the 88-year-old was resigning. “Following my recent announcement, and as I enter my 88th year, I have decided to step down from the position of Chair and as a member of the Board of Trustees, with immediate effect,” Schwab said in a brief statement. He gave no indication of what he plans to do next.
Schwab founded the World Economic Forum – originally the European Management Forum – in 1971, and its initial mission was to assist European business leaders in competing with American business and to learn from U.S. models and innovation. However, the mission soon expanded to the development of a global economic agenda.
Schwab detailed his own agenda in several books, including The Fourth Industrial Revolution (2016), in which he described the rise of a new industrial era in which technologies such artificial intelligence, gene editing, and advanced robotics would blur the lines between the digital, physical, and biological worlds. Schwab wrote:
We stand on the brink of a technological revolution that will fundamentally alter the way we live, work, and relate to one another. In its scale, scope, and complexity, the transformation will be unlike anything humankind has experienced before. We do not yet know just how it will unfold, but one thing is clear: the response to it must be integrated and comprehensive, involving all stakeholders of the global polity, from the public and private sectors to academia and civil society …
The Fourth Industrial Revolution, finally, will change not only what we do but also who we are. It will affect our identity and all the issues associated with it: our sense of privacy, our notions of ownership, our consumption patterns, the time we devote to work and leisure, and how we develop our careers, cultivate our skills, meet people, and nurture relationships. It is already changing our health and leading to a “quantified” self, and sooner than we think it may lead to human augmentation.
How? Microchips implanted into humans, for one. Schwab was a tech optimist who appeared to heartily welcome transhumanism; in a 2016 interview with France 24 discussing his book, he stated:
And then you have the microchip, which will be implanted, probably within the next ten years, first to open your car, your home, or to do your passport, your payments, and then it will be in your body to monitor your health.
In 2020, mere months into the pandemic, Schwab published COVID-19: The Great Reset, in which he detailed his view of the opportunity presented by the growing global crisis. According to Schwab, the crisis was an opportunity for a global reset that included “stakeholder capitalism,” in which corporations could integrate social and environmental goals into their operations, especially working toward “net-zero emissions” and a massive transition to green energy, and “harnessing” the Fourth Industrial Revolution, including artificial intelligence and automation.
Much of Schwab’s personal wealth came from running the World Economic Forum; as chairman, he earned an annual salary of 1 million Swiss francs (approximately $1 million USD), and the WEF was supported financially through membership fees from over 1,000 companies worldwide as well as significant contributions from organizations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Vice Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe is now serving as interim chairman until his replacement has been selected.
Canada drops retaliatory tariffs on automakers, pauses other tariffs
Ex-NYPD Cop Jailed in Beijing’s Transnational Repatriation Plot, Canada Remains Soft Target
BREAKING from THE BUREAU: Pro-Beijing Group That Pushed Erin O’Toole’s Exit Warns Chinese Canadians to “Vote Carefully”
The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence
UK Supreme Court rules ‘woman’ means biological female
Canadian student denied religious exemption for COVID jab takes tech school to court
Neil Young + Carney / Freedom Bros
-
International2 days agoPope Francis Dies on Day after Easter
-
International2 days agoJD Vance was one of the last people to meet Pope Francis
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoOttawa Confirms China interfering with 2025 federal election: Beijing Seeks to Block Joe Tay’s Election
-
2025 Federal Election24 hours agoBREAKING: THE FEDERAL BRIEF THAT SHOULD SINK CARNEY
-
COVID-191 day agoNearly Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Were Not Due to COVID-19 – Scientific Reports Journal
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoHow Canada’s Mainstream Media Lost the Public Trust
-
Media22 hours agoCBC retracts false claims about residential schools after accusing Rebel News of ‘misinformation’
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoReal Homes vs. Modular Shoeboxes: The Housing Battle Between Poilievre and Carney