Over the last 10 years, I have been building a regimen (augmented by ad hoc remedies) that has now evolved to the point where it has fixed my blood pressure. A few days ago, I decided to not renew my prescription on its last day, and instead, I started an enhanced version of my regimen at the same time – and it worked … fast! I started seeing results by the morning of the third day.
Previously, I had already fixed my arthritis, my back pain (from herniated disks), a hemorrhoid, high blood sugar, kidney stones, gum disease, sub-optimal psychology, irritable bowel syndrome, precancerous skin lesions, and respiratory illness.
The catalyst for this article was when I suddenly decided a few days ago to quit my blood pressure medicine after more than six years because I was tired of the shakedown. You may be familiar with this shakedown. It works like this: When your prescription expires, you need to find a doctor to give you permission to buy more. You know you need it, and it’s your body, and you buy it with the fruits of your own labor; but the doctor thinks it is his right to first make you sign away all your rights, pay him, visit him, give him your blood, and make promises to obey.
Try buying medicine without a doctor’s permission, or try competing with the doctor to provide medical services – you will go to jail, and yet, their advice hasn’t been very helpful to me, and has often been wrong. I guess that’s why they need protection from competition.
I pretty much don’t need them anymore, but did I really beat the cartel … given how Obamacare makes me pay them anyway?
During the shakedown, you may even have to become an actor and pretend that you will follow the doctor’s advice when you may already know better. You must also assert that you are a very happy and well adjusted person (which I always am) who respects the doctor and doesn’t think he is part of a cartel or that he is perpetrating a shakedown; otherwise, he could have you detained for days, drugged, and put on the no-fly list. BTW, the CDC is requesting the right to indefinitely detain you. The doctor could have the government take your kids and your right to keep and bear arms – just on his whim.
Just like the police, the politicians, and the rich and famous … doctors are above the law.
Calling it a shakedown by a cartel is thus an understatement. It is also cronyism, fascism, and tyranny.
The Washington Post informs me that I am being played by Putin.
Bullshit! I’m not being played! I am one of the players!
It’s not just me. It’s the whole liberty movement. We all work for Putin (the former KGB agent). The socialists and progressives see right through us because they obviously have such a firm grasp on reality. That’s why they agree with their leader, Hillary Clinton, who says we are all deplorable and irredeemable. In other words, we are less than human – like how everyone sees cannibals – like how their great grand father saw his family’s slaves – and how their grand father saw Jews … So in touch with reality they are.
I was not aware of some of these sites, so I would like to say “Thanks!” to the Washington Post for telling me so many sites where I can find the truth. Saves me lots of time.
Although EndOfInnocence.com is not explicitly mentioned on their enemies list, many of the sites listed are on the same page as EndOfInnocence on most issues. Some of them are in the list of recommended sites on EndOfInnocence. In fact, many of them are less extreme than EndOfInnocence. Therefore, my main concern is … What am I doing wrong?! How do I get on that list?!
On a more serious note, at least one of these sites (Paul Craig Roberts) is indeed anti-American and pro-Russian. It is a fake anti-establishment site. It is a Psyop, but it is far more likely to be CIA than Russian. It uses real conspiracies as bait while trying to make Americans feel bad about being Americans and while subtley promoting big government. It is like a sneakier version of the socialist and progressive sites.
While I am being serious, why would the Washington Post, which vies with the NYT to be the most important newspaper in America, make such an extreme credibility destroying move right after having lost so much of their remaining credibility after getting caught cheating for Hillary? Such an extreme move smacks of desperation.
From what could they be so desperate to distract us? Could it be Pizzagate, which by itself could set the globalist elite back 50 years?
Many who refuse to vote have been played by the Don’t Vote Psyop.
Consider that I vote even though I don’t need any rulers, which makes me a kind of anarchist – an anarchist who votes – but only for candidates who might effect a net gain in freedom, reality, and quality of life.
I know that democracy is illegitimate.
I know that the Constitution either authorizes the government we have, or has been unable to prevent it.
I know that one vote cannot make a difference.
I know all of this, and still I vote.
I know that the system is rigged so that it has become nearly impossible for good candidates to win or to effect change if they do win.
I know that government schools, mainstream churches, crony corporations, the entire mainstream media, most of the “alternative” media, millions of individuals who depend on government, and millions of other useful idiots …
will fabricate …
will prevent debate …
to prevent good candidates from winning …
to prevent them from effecting change if they do win …
and to prevent them from existing in the first place …
just as there were no capitalist candidates in the USSR.
I know that most good people, at any point, can be turned with bribes and threats.
I know that any good person who is about to effect change, and who cannot be turned, will be killed.
I know all of this, and still I vote.
I know that the perpetrators (the enemies of humanity) and their useful idiots will spout the logical fallacy that if I vote, then I support the system, but of course, it is possible to vote and not support the system – I do it all the time.
Those at the top are just trying to bully me into not voting. Naturally, if you are awake, then they don’t want you to vote, which is why they spread the logically fallacious meme that voting is acceptance of the system. I call this the Don’t Vote Psyop.
I know that the Don’t Vote Psyop makes my vote even less effective, but still I vote.
Most of the people don’t know any of the things I know, but they do know that “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.” When violent revolution comes, the media will spin it as how so-called rebels chose to fight rather than vote, and they will thus succeed in making those who refused to vote be unfairly viewed as the scourge of humanity. Then, it will be even more difficult to educate others – to put it mildly.
There are other reasons to vote.
Consider that one can write in any name for President. Now consider that if there are no other candidates in any other races who might be a net gain, then not voting for them would make it clear that someone who voted rejected all of those other candidates. That is worth saying. Also, imagine that universally accepted good guy James Corbett (among those who refuse to vote) received one write-in vote. Now imagine that he received one million write-in votes. That would send a message that is worth the effort of saying it.
Sometimes, the correct decision is actually voting for the lesser of two evils, but only if they were even in an accurate poll, and only if there were no third candidate who had any chance of winning. For example, suppose you had access to the results of an accurate poll of every voter in your state, and suppose that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton got the exact same number of votes in that poll. Now suppose you believed that Donald Trump was clearly the lesser of two evils, and was thus clearly a net gain over Hillary, but you used your weapon (your vote) to vote third party, or suppose you didn’t use you weapon at all, and then Hillary won your state by one vote … and suppose winning your state caused Hillary to win the Presidency … That would make you a pretty douchy person. You would know it, and everyone you know would know it. You would never live it down.
To be clear, voting is the least effective thing I do. It is far more valuable to educate myself and others, but that is also far more time consuming and expensive. I wouldn’t vote if it cost me any more time, money, or other trouble, and I wouldn’t vote if there were no candidates who might effect a net gain. Nor would I fight for the right to vote in such a corrupt. anti-human. illegitimate system because voting is so ineffective, and especially because voting is how the rulers make the people believe that they are free and that their rulers are legitimate. Harriet Tubman said, “I freed a thousand slaves, and I could have freed a thousand more … if only they had known they were slaves.”
Finally, your act of voting will generate good will from others; whereas, not voting is a slap in the face to others. Voting signals to others that you are responsible and peaceful, and it is even an opportunity to educate those at the ballot box who will be more engaged than at any other time.
Anyone who falls for the Don’t Vote Psyop has been played.
This was another very sad week in American history. A woman ran her car into a gate at the White House (and minutes later while driving away, she was shot and killed by police as she drove), then the next day and just a few blocks away, a man set himself on fire on the Capitol Mall in DC.
I instinctively and correctly assumed that both were black, and I think that my instincts were telling me that the woman must have been motivated by disappointment with Obama, and that only black people could be that disappointed with Obama.
In the case of the man, it was obviously extreme disappointment with something, and I think my instincts were telling me that based on the timing and location, it was obviously extreme disappointment with Obama.
This is like in 2011 when the media and other Obama voters were complaining that the media and other Obama voters were abandoning Obama, and I explained to everyone that he could rally them to new heights of hope and motivation with a single speech because they were just really frustrated that he had not yet given them their orders.
Believers said I was way off, but then Chris Matthews proved me right when he cried out to Obama on-air and said ”Obama, give us our orders!”
Believers are not that hard to understand, although, apparently they don’t understand themselves.
As a further proof, consider that a few weeks before this, I instinctively did not assume that the shooter at the DC Navy Yard was black. When I then learned that he was black, even though he was also in DC and almost certainly voted for Obama, my instincts still told me it had nothing to do with Obama or race. Again, my instincts were correct.
In the Navy Yard case my instincts were correct on both of my additional suspicions. First, I correctly assumed that the media were lying about the use of an AR-15, just like they lied in Sandy Hook. In both cases, the MSM later quietly admitted that neither an AR-15, nor any other kind of rifle was used – thus ensuring the majority retained their original false impression.
Second, he carved, “This is my ELF weapon” on his shotgun, which the media called gibberish, but my instincts told me that he was seeking retribution for being harassed by Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) technology, which is a complaint shared by thousands of people. My instincts were confirmed again when I learned that he had complained to peers, police, and healthcare professionals about the kind of harassment done via ELF and was moving around to escape from it.
The newly formed Republican party wanted to abolish slavery; whereas, the already existing Democratic Party wanted to promote slavery. Therefore, we see that the rhetoric of both parties is consistent with their history. The Republicans have always claimed that no man has a right to the fruits of another man’s labor; whereas, the Democrats have always promised the fruits of other men’s labor to whoever would vote for them. A majority of those who want something for nothing will thus prefer the Democratic Party.
The mainstream media, academia, and the government actively promote the Democratic Party, and actively oppose the Republican Party. A majority of those who do not think for themselves will thus prefer the Democratic Party.
Of course, those who think for themselves and who take the time to investigate, know that, regardless of which party is in power, the overall trend of government is higher taxes, more spending, more borrowing, more corruption, more wealth redistribution, more violation of the Constitution, more propaganda, more political factions, more fear, more hate, and more regulation of your life and your business.
It is almost as if both parties were merely front men for the same elite interests, and for some issues one is the good cop and the other is the bad cop; whereas, for other issues, it is the reverse. It is almost as if most politics, news media, and academic studies were never intended to find or solve real problems, but were actually intended to incite fear of each other, fear of nature, and fear of the unknown, so that we will empower them to control others, control nature, and control the unknown.
What politicians really need is not just fear, but conflict, and fear leads to hate, and hate leads to anger, and anger leads to action, which is why politicians prefer to motivate us directly by inciting hate instead of fear. Of course, it is very difficult for politicians to sell themselves as the solution to the very hate that they themselves are fomenting, and some politicians, such as Bill Clinton, are almost that skilled, but even such a master politician must choose the faction that controls the media, so that the media will give him the cover he needs. Democrats are thus able to promote the New Hate because they have sufficient cover from the media.
Let’s look at a recent example.
The media and the Democrats incited hatred in the black community and in the politically correct community while suppressing dissent, which resulted in more votes for the Democratic Party.
I am an atheist who sees American Christians as allies in many ways because I find them to be both more open minded than progressives and more open to individual freedom than progressives.
There are two big reasons why American Christians are more open to freedom and to ideas in general than are progressives. 1) American Christians are more open to American tradition, which is mostly about individual liberty. 2) The entire mainstream media is constantly bashing Christians; whereas, they are constantly reinforcing progressive fallacies, thus forcing Christians to constantly think about and defend their positions, while insulating progressives from having to think about and defend their positions.
Nevertheless, there are several reasons why I am not a Christian, and any one of them is sufficient by itself. 1) I was at one time as sincere of a Christian as anyone has been, but over time I grew to find it no longer convincing. 2) The Bible is pretty flawed. 3) The actions of Christians today and throughout history are questionable. 4) There is little reason to believe in magic when there is no evidence other than a claim and many believers in that claim. 5) There is no reason to believe something when doing so will add nothing to my quality of life. 6) Religion is unnecessary for ethics.
Let’s look at the necessity of the Bible or any other religious text for living ethically.
If you are able to determine that the content of a religious text prescribes ethical behavior, then you already know how to behave ethically, and thus you don’t need it.
Let’s look at how the content of the Bible is flawed.
It says there is only one God, and it says that God is all powerful, all knowing, 100% good, 100% just, 100% fair, 100% perfect, and that he created everything. Then it says that God claims he is jealous of other gods, which contradicts the general nature of God as explained in the Bible.
It was written by a people (Jews) who claim it is what God told them, and what God told them was that they are his chosen people. The Bible thus promotes racism. I wonder if God’s chosen people are racist today …
More specifically, God told a man that all of the descendants of one of his sons would be his chosen people, but that the descendants of his other son would not be. Being one of God’s chosen people thus depends solely on your family tree. The Bible thus promotes nepotism. I wonder if God’s chosen people engage in nepotism today …
God allowed his chosen people to be slaves in Egypt for 400 years. The Bible thus promotes slavery.
Then God threatened to send ten plagues on Egyptians if they didn’t free the Jews. The plagues included murdering Egyptian children if the Pharaoh did not agree. The Bible thus promotes genocide.
Then God hardened the Pharaoh’s heart so that he would not agree. The Bible thus promotes what can only be described as fraud perpetrated through mind rape.
It says God stopped the sun. Wouldn’t God want to gain a little credibility by claiming that he stopped the earth from turning, and thus be the first to claim that the sun does not go around the earth?
What about continents, stars, and galaxies. Why is there nothing?
What about atoms, germs, and evolution? Why is there nothing?
What about predicting the future? Why are there only vague predictions?
The Old Testament thus contains no advanced information at all, but it does contain a lot of material about how God demanded animal sacrifices – just like every other primitive culture. The Bible thus promotes primitive thinking and taxation.
Two of every species fit into one boat?
To one who reads the Bible and thinks for oneself, the the Bible is obviously self-contradictory and primitive, and it promotes fraud, taxation, rape, slavery, racism, superstition, and genocide.
Therefore, why would anyone believe the Old Covenant, which is the source of all of my examples thus far? Why would anyone want to believe it?
Jesus says that God loves you, but the New Covenant contradicts him when it goes on to say that non-believers will burn in a lake of sulfur for all eternity. Don’t forget who created everything and who is all powerful, so basically God is doing that to you. Would a just god do that? Would a God who loves you do that – just for not believing something so primitive, self-contradictory, and unethical as the Bible? The Bible thus promotes the logical fallacy that might makes right.
You could be the most ethical person in the world, but if you don’t conform, you will burn for all eternity? The bible thus promotes fascism.
The texts chosen for inclusion in the Bible were determined by Emperor Constantine in the 4th Century. The Bible thus encourages censorship.
The texts chosen just happened to be those most compatible with building and controlling an empire. The Bible thus promotes big government and big organized religion. Christianity was previously about a personal relationship with God, and there was little interest in a religious bureaucracy like the Catholic Church.
The entire Old Testament and some of the New Testament seems to have been inspired by the Soul of Animals; whereas, the teachings of Jesus seem to have been inspired by the Soul of Humanity, and thus Jesus may have been one of the first people to evolve with the Soul of Humanity. In fact, Jesus was a significant inspiration in the development of my theory of the Soul of Humanity. So, you could say I’m a fan, and thus a kind of Christian if you want.
Ordinarily, I wouldn’t believe that the government had removed an anti-government show from everyone’s TiVo, but in the past, I had a similar experience myself …
Some entity remotely edited one of the MP3 files on my PC to remove an anti-government lyric!
In 2008, I listened to the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band’s version of the long time bluegrass favorite, Rocky Top, at least 50 times. It was my favorite song in 2008, and my favorite verse was this:
Once two strangers climbed ole Rocky Top,
Lookin’ for a moonshine still.
Strangers ain’t come down from Rocky Top,
Guess they never will.
Then I listened to my playlist again for the first time in 3 months while I was working on my computer, and I replayed Rocky Top for a total of exactly 4 times because I kept missing my favorite verse in my favorite song.
Or so I thought.
I replayed Rocky Top, and listened without distraction a 5th time.
My favorite verse … in my favorite song … had been removed!
The vocals and instrumentals were identical. There was nothing unusual about the point where my favorite verse would have been. The edit was seamless. The file dates revealed no tampering.
I had already overwritten all of my backups by this time, so I went online and tried to find any copy of Rocky Top by the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band that contained the censored verse, but I could find neither a commercial copy nor a bootleg copy that contained the verse.
I sent a furious email to the management of the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band at the time, but got no response.
I immediately found nine web pages with the lyrics for Rocky Top, and they ALL contained my favorite verse. Then, a few months later, the verse had been removed from ALL of those web pages too! For about a year, it was very difficult to find the verse in any online lyrics, but then I started finding it again.
I searched for comments online explaining how the same thing had happened to others, but I found nothing.
I don’t think that removing this verse was the goal of this entity. I think this was just a test, but not the kind of test you think. You see, I explained this at the time to my Russian friend and coworker (let’s call him Nikita), who knew me very well, and he didn’t believe me.
Nikita said the verse must have never been there! What’s more, he knew that I had been a PC software developer for over 20 years, and yet he expressed doubt that I knew how to look at the dates on a file! So, I think what this had actually been was
a test of how easily this entity could change history,
and I’d say they were pleased with the results based on the mental gymnastics the Nikitas of the world are willing to perform to maintain their normalcy bias.
My review of Atlas Shrugged on Netflix was not the first, but it quickly gathered votes until it was the third highest. Then in mid-January, Netflix suddenly erased about 100 “helpful” votes – with no loss of “unhelpful” votes. After a few days, my review was still the only one that had lost votes, so this was not a bug in their system, and thus someone with access to the Netflix database had removed votes from my review.
As of February 15th Netflix has erased over 150 helpful votes for my review – still with no loss of “unhelpful votes”.
In case you don’t know, Atlas Shrugged is an extremely polarizing movie because it strikes at the very core of progressivism, socialism, communism, fascism, and any other form of big government, while at the same time it champions individual entrepreneurial genius. Therefore, Atlas Shrugged really upsets those who conform to the dominant groupthink in America, such as OWS, Obama fans, academia, and the media.
Perhaps my review itself explains it best:
Atlas Shrugged is a dangerous movie. It exposes and subverts the dominant struggle of recorded history, which is the war of the takers against the makers. The main point is how those who simply pursue their own self interest with honesty, boldness, and confidence help the world immensely; whereas, those who claim they want to help the world by forcing others to provide that help are causing the world more harm than good. The technique is perfect. It makes hundreds of points by simply letting us watch the lives of the characters, and the characters don’t bore us with pedantic words like capitalism or socialism. I don’t even recall them using the word government – how refreshing. Most people wont get Atlas Shrugged because we have been programmed to see the world the way the Takers want us to see it; therefore, your supposed to hate this movie, but see it anyway and let the healing begin. If you weren’t choking back tears when they crossed the bridge, then your soul is definitely sick. The story? Two of the last noble captains of industry, Dagny Taggert and Hank Rearden, fall in love and try to save the world in spite of mountains of insult and injury heaped upon them by their ungrateful friends, relatives, and government. Read the full version at endofinnocence.com.
You can see in the screen shots that the other reviews are quite bland compared to mine, and are thus no threat to their collectivist groupthink. You can see then why my review would really upset the collectivists, and motivate them to tamper with the votes.
Of course, people continued to vote, and so after a few days, it climbed up to 60 helpful votes out of 69. That’s right, ten out of the next ten votes found my review helpful. Then, someone deleted 20 more votes and my review dropped down to 40 helpful votes out of 49. Note how only the votes for “Helpful” keep getting deleted; whereas, the votes for “Unhelpful” never get deleted.
Then on February 15th I discovered that Netflix had just deleted at least 36 more votes. As the screenshots show, I had 76 out of 85 three days earlier, and then I suddenly only had only 40 out of 49 again! Only “helpful” votes had been deleted in this third tampering – but not “unhelpful” votes. You may also have noticed that I had gathered 36 more “helpful” votes and not one “unhelpful” vote in that time.
The tampering is also targeting me personally. For example, since the first tampering, whenever I have voted for other reviews of Atlas Shrugged (or any other movie) the screen shots below prove that my vote never got counted, even after several weeks, even though the system remembers my vote. Whereas, before the first tampering, my votes always registered instantly.
I called Netflix technical support in late January, and the tech was nice enough to forward my complaint on to their IT department, but still nothing has changed. In fact, what prompted me to write this article on January 29th, was that when I checked to see if they had restored my votes yet, another review with only 40 votes had replaced mine as the third most helpful! Then after ten minutes of looking for my review, it reappeared on the first page again with 50 out of 59 votes.
Since the movie first appeared, I have checked back about once a week to see both the rating of my review and of the movie itself. Up until someone deleted the first block of votes for my review, the movie itself had consistently rated 4.1, but on the same day that I discovered the loss 100 votes for my review, I also discovered that the movie itself had somehow suddenly jumped down to 3.5 – very suspicious.
There was no other review with anywhere near 40 votes, and now there is, so I suspect that in addition to deleting my votes, their thinking is that if they periodically replace my review with another less dangerous review, then eventually it will have more helpful votes than mine, but those pesky little voters just keep liking my review.
If you think this is far fetched, consider that I recently worked as a software developer at a company more prominent than Netflix and having even more online accounts than Netflix, and just like about 200 other IT people there, I could see your credit card numbers, your password, your purchases, and your address. Perhaps more relevant is that I could have changed your data too if I had wanted to, and no one could have been sure who had done it either.
See how my review lost 36 votes in three days in mid-February:
See how my review gets replaced periodically by a safe review having far less votes:
See how my vote no longer counts:
Since adding the ClusterMaps counter a few days ago, I was first surprised to find that my site is getting more interest from Italy than from the United Kingdom, but then I noticed that the more populous nation of Germany is missing entirely! Austria too …
I probably get more interest from Italy because I mention Italy and Germany in this recent article on A Progressive Platform.
Clearly, Germany has the Wisdom to protect it’s people from web sites containing political, historical, economic, and philosophical analysis containing the words: fascism, Nazi, Hitler, etc.
(update 9/27/2013) As the counters show, Germans are now able to find and visit this site, and have been visiting in greater numbers than Italians, which is exactly what I said we should expect – assuming no censorship. Therefore, after the German government’s censors had time to evaluate it, they decided it was not trying to promote Nazism, and thus Germans are now permitted to find/visit it. Don’t assume that access to this site was actually blocked. Given that blocking access to sites would be easier for us to catch, it is more likely that it was just automatically moved down in the search engines based on keywords I had recently introduced to the site about three weeks before I added the counter.
Are you surprised? Consider that Germany bans the symbols and literature of any group it deems to be unconstitutional.
But that’s not fascism – because they don’t call it that.
8 oz tomato juice
1 tbsp Everclear (add another tbsp if very cynical)
1 tsp vinegar
1 tsp brown sugar
1 tsp horseradish
1 tsp powedered sugar
1/2 tsp molasses
1/2 tsp lime juice
1/2 tsp lemon juice
1/2 tsp Thai fish sauce
1/2 tsp celery salt
1/2 tsp onion power
1/4 tsp dill weed
1/8 tsp cayenne pepper
1/8 tsp black pepper
1/8 tsp white pepper
1/8 tsp ginger
1/8 tsp cloves
1/8 tsp wasabi