Connect with us

Alternative News

Noam Chomsky Discusses How Trump & the Media Distract Us From What’s Really Going On

Published

on

Corporations are more than willing to pay a lot of money to control the narrative discussed on mainstream media, and news stations happily oblige because their pockets are being filled. It’s not just corporations that take advantage of mass media, whether that be through advertising or even manipulating and fabricating “news,” but the government, too.

advertisement - learn more

The U.S. government even created a CIA-sanctioned program whose sole focus was to manipulate mainstream news to align with their own agenda, called Operation Mockingbird, and the CIA coined the term “conspiracy theory” to confuse the public regarding any real, correct information that was spread through outlets that weren’t considered mainstream news.

-->Facebook Just Shut Us Down: We need your help in taking our power back from big tech, to overcome censorship and the attack on free speech. Click here to help!

The government strategically introduced that term in order to cast doubt upon the public and influence the narrative, as evidenced in the design laid out by “Document 1035-960 Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report,” a report issued in early 1967 to Agency bureaus all over the world.

To learn more, you can watch the following banned Saturday Night Live video:

Noam Chomsky on Mainstream Media and Propaganda 

MIT Professor Noam Chomsky has become infamous for his thoughts on mainstream media and U.S. propaganda, and is most commonly known for his illustration of the “Propaganda Model.” Chomsky’s model includes five filters that expose how the media is controlled and completely infiltrated by corporations, governments, and the elite.

advertisement - learn more

The five filters include:

  1. Size, Ownership, and Profit Orientation of the Mass Media: The idea that mainstream media is essentially owned by corporations and the government, because those are the very agents who fund them.
  2. Advertising License to Do Business: The idea that mass media isn’t interested in attracting viewers to educate them, but rather to sell them on something.
  3. Sourcing Mass-Media News: Since the majority of the public trusts the government and mass corporations, AKA the propaganda machines, most of the “newsworthy” content comes from them. This allows users to create a sense of trust towards these sources, falsely deeming others less credible and creating belief systems that prevent viewers from critically thinking.
  4. Flak and the Enforcers: “Flak” refers to negative responses to a media statement or program aired on the network. If the media presents a story a corporation or the government dislikes, these entities will create “flak” so the media won’t do it again.
  5. Anticommunism as a Control Mechanism: By creating an extremely anti-communist state, the elite will never have to worry about losing control over society because their wealth and power remain safe and sound.

You can read more about Noam Chomsky’s five filters of mass media in our CE article here.

Chomsky’s Recent Interview 

Chomsky was recently featured in a new interview titled “A Continuing Conversation With Geographers.” Chomsky discusses a wide range of subjects, from the Trump administration to mass media to even the war on space.

Chomsky explores the idea that the U.S. is living in a fear state constantly perpetuated by the mainstream media, the government, and the elite.

“The U.S. has always been a very frightened society, maybe the safest country in the world, but very frightened, doesn’t take much to scare people,” Chomsky explains. He then provides an example of a story he read that morning in the New York Times that created fear surrounding Muslims, and also gets into examples of people being stopped in airports solely because they appear to be Muslim.

He goes on to explain that there’s an extreme hatred or distaste in society regarding institutions, and for good reason. However, these feelings of distaste will either lead to two things: violence and destruction, or optimism and hope for positive change. He offers an example of hope using the last U.S. election.

Chomsky states, “The most startling event in the election was not the election of Trump, it was the success of Bernie Sanders. That breaks from literally a century or more of U.S. political history. . . .  [A] very good predictor of electoral success is just campaign funding.”

“Sanders came along, no funding, no corporate funding, no wealthy funding, dismissed and disregarded by the media, a guy who was totally almost unknown, and he was using scare words like ‘socialist,’ which means you deal with Democrats, and he practically, if it hadn’t been for party shenanigans and managers, he might have won the election. That’s not only a radical change from American history, but also a very promising and hopeful sign for the future.”

Chomsky makes an excellent point, in that Sanders really was one of the first presidential candidates who was more “independent” than others in the past. Those party shenanigans he referred to relate to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) plot against Sanders, as he was seen as a threat to Clinton’s campaign. The DNC was actually sued by Bernie Sanders supporters last year for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, deceptive conduct, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence.

Evidence in support of the class action suit included the leaked DNC documents and emails, in which former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz aimed to dismantle the Sanders campaign, and other DNC officials spread lies, often remarkably petty ones, about both his campaign and character.

Chomsky then discussed the importance of alternative media and how that has shaped our ability to access information. Chomsky isn’t shy about his views on mainstream media, as you can see within his Propaganda model, and he points out the shift that they will have to go through in order for them to thrive in the future.

The audience also had an opportunity to ask questions. When asked about extraterrestrials and control of space, though he doubted some ideas, he stated: “If you look at military planning, they regard control of space as a critical element of running the world, they want the ways of directing that can hit a narrowly identified target within minutes for them to control outer space, massive surveillance, and all sorts of other ideas. No doubt that that’s all being developed, in fact you can read about it even in the public documents.”

That fast technology he was referring to involve zero point energy, which allegedly allows UFOs to travel much faster than our current technology. This has been discussed in some declassified documents and even in the DNC email leaks, as John Podesta was in contact with Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the 6th man to walk on the moon. Within those emails, they discussed zero point energy, the war in space, and extraterrestrials.

One of the emails reads:

Dear John,

Because the War in Space race is heating up, I felt you should be aware of several factors as you and I schedule our Skype talk.

Remember, our nonviolent ETI from the contiguous universe are helping us bring zero point energy to Earth. They will not tolerate any forms of military violence on Earth or in space.

The following information in italics was shared with me by my colleague Carol Rosin, who worked closely for several years with Wernher von Braun before his death.

Carol and I have worked on the Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, attached for your convenience.

Chomsky then discusses his views on the Trump administration and how the U.S. government is still controlling what the public gets to know and not know. The government controls the narrative on the news and is in control of disclosure.

Chomsky explains, “What’s going on is a very systematic two-tiered operation. One of them is Trump, Bannon, the effort to try to make sure you capture the headlines, that you’re top of the news, one crazy thing after another just to capture people’s attention. And the assumption is ‘Well they’re gonna forget later anyway.’ Pretty soon they’ll stop talking about the wire tap and they’ll be onto something else.”

He then goes on to refer to some government programs, which he claims have only a few basic principles: “One, be sure to offer to the rich and powerful gifts beyond the dreams of avarice, and kick everyone else in the face. And it’s going on step by step right behind the bluster. When you take a look at the cabinet, the cabinet was designed for that and every cabinet official was chosen to destroy anything of human significance in that part of the government. It’s so systematic it can’t be unplanned. I doubt that Trump planned it . . . whoever is working on it is doing a pretty effective job, and the Democrats are cooperating.”

Chomsky also hones in on all of this drama with Russia in the mainstream media, which is demonizing Trump for even talking to them. He explains how this is not a bad thing, and it’s certainly no worse than just doing nothing other than building up their military force. Why resort to violence when we can talk instead? 

He then goes on to discuss how the government completely controls the narrative in regards to what the public is told about everything. Chomsky explains, “Parts of the governmental structure that are beneficial to human beings and to future generations are being systematically destroyed, and with very little attention.”

You can watch the full interview here:

 

 

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Vancouver Council Votes Against Mandatory Mask Mandate: They’re Not Required

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Vancouver, Canada will not have a required mask policy in civic facilities, and instead will simply recommend that people wear them.

  • Reflect On:

    Should governments recommend what they feel we should do and present the science instead of forcing certain measures on the population that many people and health professionals clearly disagree with?

What Happened: The city of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada will not mandate masks inside city buildings and will “strongly encourage” people to wear them instead. This is a bold move as many cities across the globe have mandatory mask measures in place.

The proposal by Counc. Sarah Kirby-Yung, which would have required masks inside city buildings, was opposed by more than a dozen speakers who pleaded with the city council to vote against it.

“Please consider our forefathers fought for our freedom, and if we release that choice, it’s the first step towards a dictatorship,” said one speaker according to City News. “Masks are used as weapons and they have certainly been used as weapons against me and others to silence and marginalize us and it’s not fair.”

According to Coun. Christine Boyle, public health experts encourage wearing masks, but a mandatory policy is not needed.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Positive Association Found Amongst COVID Deaths & Flu Shot Rates Worldwide In Elderly

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A recently published paper has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

  • Reflect On:

    Why does vaccine hesitancy continue to grow worldwide? What's going on? What information/factors are contributing to this hesitancy?

What Happened: A recently published study in PeerJ  by Christian Wehenkel, a Professor at Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango in Mexico, has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

According to the study, “The results showed a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and IVR (influenza vaccination rate) of people ≥65 years-old. There is a significant increase in COVID-19 deaths from eastern to western regions in the world. Further exploration is needed to explain these findings, and additional work on this line of research may lead to prevention of deaths associated with COVID-19.”

To determine this association, data sets from 39 countries with more than half a million people were analyzed.

The study was published on October 1st, and two weeks later a note from the publisher appeared atop the paper emphasizing that correlation does not equal causation, and that this paper “should not be taken to suggest that receiving the influenza vaccination results in an increased risk of death for an individual with COVID-19 as there may be confounding factors at play.”

The paper provides evidence from others which have recently been published that ponder if the flu shot could increase ones chance of contracting and dying from COVID-19.

For example, this study published in April of 2020, reported a negative correlation between influenza vaccination rates (IVRs) and COVID-19 related mortality and morbidity. Marín-Hernández, Schwartz & Nixon (2020) also showed epidemiological evidence of an association between higher influenza vaccine uptake by elderly people and lower percentage of COVID-19 deaths in Italy, which directly contradicts the author’s own findings and suggests that the flu shot may help prevent COVID-19 related deaths.

He goes on to mention another study:

In a study analyzing 92,664 clinically and molecularly confirmed COVID-19 cases in Brazil, Fink et al. (2020) reported that patients who received a recent flu vaccine experienced on average 17% lower odds of death. Moreover, Pawlowski et al. (2020) analyzed the immunization records of 137,037 individuals who tested positive in a SARS-CoV-2 PCR. They found that polio, Hemophilus influenzae type-B, measles-mumps-rubella, varicella, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13), geriatric flu, and hepatitis A/hepatitis B (HepA-HepB) vaccines, which had been administered in the past 1, 2, and 5 years, were associated with decreased SARS-CoV-2 infection rates.

So, its important to mention that correlations between the flu vaccine have also found that it may decrease ones chance of deaths from COVID-19.

But are there studies that have shown an increased chance of death or contracting other respiratory viruses as a result of getting the flu shot? Yes.

That’s also discussed in the paper. For example, he mentions a paper published in 2018:

In a study with 6,120 subjects, Wolff (2020) reported that influenza vaccination was significantly associated with a higher risk of some other respiratory diseases, due to virus interference. In a specific examination of non-influenza viruses, the odds of coronavirus infection (but not the COVID-19 virus) in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher, when compared to unvaccinated individuals (odds ratio = 1.36).

The study above found the flu shot to increase the risk of other coronaviruses among those who had been vaccinated for influenza by 36 percent. The study was conducted prior to COVID-19, so it’s not included and only applies to pre-existing coronaviruses. The study also found an even higher chance of contracting human metapneumovirus amongst those who had received the flu shot.

Below are some more studies regarding the flu shot and viral infections that hint to the same idea.

  • 2018 CDC study (Rikin et al 2018) found that flu shots increase the risk of non-flu acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs), including coronavirus, in children.
  • A 2011 Australian study (Kelly et al 2011) found that flu shots doubled the risk for non-flu viral lung infections.
  • 2012 Hong Kong study (Cowling et al 2012) found that flu shots increase the risk for non-flu respiratory infections by 4.4 times.
  • 2017 study (Mawson et al 2017) found vaccinated children were 5.9 times more likely to suffer pneumonia than their unvaccinated peers.

Why This Is Important: We live in an age where vaccinations are heavily marketed. We’ve seen this with the flu shot time and time again and we are also living in an age where a push for more mandated vaccines seems to be growing.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal) and also an assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. He published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

This is a touchy subject that dives into medical ethics and the connections that big pharmaceutical companies have with our federal health regulatory agencies and health associations. Vaccines are a multi billion dollar industry.

At a recent World Health Organization conference on vaccine safety, it was expressed that vaccine hesitancy is growing at quite a fast pace, especially among doctors who are now becoming hesitant to recommend certain vaccines on the schedule. You can read more about that and find links to the conference here.

We have to ask ourselves, why is this happening? Is it because people and professionals are becoming aware of certain information that warrants the freedom of choice? Should freedom of choice with regards to what we put in our body always remain? Are we really protecting the “herd” by taking these actions?

In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors show that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” It is time, they suggest, to cast aside coercion in favor of voluntary choice.

When it comes to the flu shot, I put more information and science as to why so many people seem to refuse it, in this article if interested.

The University of California is currently being sued for mandating the flu shot for all staff, faculty and students. A judge has prevented them from doing so as a result until a decision has been made. You can read more about that here.

In South Korea, 48 people have now died after receiving the flu shot this season causing a lot of controversy. You can read more about that here.

The Takeaway: There are many concerns with vaccines, and vaccine injury is one of them. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Should these statistics alone warrant the freedom of choice? Should the government have the ability to force us into measures, or would it simply be better for them to present the science, make recommendations and urge people to follow them? When the citizenry is forced and coerced into certain actions, sometimes under the guise of good-will, there always seems to be a tremendous amount of uproar and people who disagree. Why are these people silenced? Why are they censored? Why are they ridiculed? Why don’t independent health organizations receive the same voice and reach that government and state “owned” or organizations do? What’s going on here? Do we really live in a free, open and transparent world or are we simply subjected to massive amounts of perception manipulation?

When it come to the flu shot there is plenty of information on both sides of the coin that point to its effectiveness, and on the other hand there is information that points to the complete opposite. When something is not 100 percent clear, freedom of choice in all places should always remain, in my opinion.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Some South Korean Doctors & Politicians Call To Stop Flu Shots After 48 People Die

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The number of South Koreans who have died after getting flu shots has risen to 48, but health authorities in South Korea have found no link between the vaccine and the deaths.

  • Reflect On:

    Is the flu shot as safe as it's marketed to be?

What Happened: It’s that time of year and flu shot programs are rolling out across the globe. The number of South Koreans who have died after getting the flu shot has now risen to 48 and some South Korean doctors and politicians have called to stop flu shots as a result, according to Reuters. The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) has decided not to stop the program, and that flu vaccines would continue to be given and will reduce the chance of having simultaneous epidemics in the era of COVID-19.

Health authorities in South Korea have explained that they’ve found no direct link between these deaths and the shots. KDCA Director Jeong Eun-kyung said, “After reviewing death cases so far, it is not the time to suspend a flu vaccination programme since vaccination is very crucial this year, considering…the COVID-19 outbreaks.”

According to Reuters, “Some initial autopsy results from the police and the National Forensic Service showed that 13 people died of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and other disorders not caused by the vaccination.”

The South Korean government is hopeful to vaccinate approximately 30 million of the country’s 54 million people.

Concerns Some People Have With The Flu Shot: One concern many people seem to have is the worry of a severe adverse reaction.

Dr. Alvin Moss, MD and professor at the West Virginia University School of Medicine emphasizes in this video:

The flu vaccine happens to be the vaccine that causes the most injury in this country. The vaccine injury compensation program, 40 percent of all vaccinations in this country are flu shots, but 60 percent of all the compensations are for the flu vaccine. So a disproportionate number of  vaccine related injuries are the flu shot.

Moss is one of many who believe that the flu vaccine is not as effective as it’s been marketed to be. For example,  A study recently published in Global Advances In Health & Medicine titled “Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19—Update From Shanghai and U.S. Medical Institutions outlines the following:

Recently outlined A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal)  published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

These are just a few examples out of many claiming that the flu shot has not really been effective, opposing others that claim it is.  Mercury that’s still present in some flu shots also seems to be a concern.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project stated at a World Health Organization (WHO) conference that more doctors are starting to be hesitant when it comes to recommending vaccines.

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers, we have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen… still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider…

This is no secret, and actions against mandates are being taken. The University of California was recently sued for making the flu shot mandatory. That trial will begin soon, and you can read more about it here, and find information regarding the claim that the flu shot can help in the times of COVID-19.

The Takeaway: We are living in an age of extreme censorship of information, no matter how credible or how much evidence is provided, information that goes against the grain always seems to receive a harsh backlash from mainstream media as well as social media outlets. Why is there a digital fact checker patrolling the internet? Should people not have the right to examine information openly and freely and determine for themselves what is and what isn’t?

As far as vaccines are concerned, despite the fact that there are many safety issues the scientific community  is bringing up, a push for vaccine mandates continues and the idea that we are protecting other people is usually the narrative that’s pushed hard. Vaccine skepticism is growing at a fast pace among people of all professions, and people aren’t stupid. There’s a reason why more and more people are starting to question what we’ve been told for years, and those reasons should be acknowledged and openly discussed amongst people on both sides of the coin.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!