As you’ve probably already heard, Facebook is getting a lot of bad press lately, for multiple reasons. Sometimes it seems we’re coming down too hard on Facebook, because to be honest, it’s been a great tool for connecting people worldwide, and also a great tool to share free and open information away from the influence of corporate and government influence.
-->Watch now: Sign up for the free 5G Summit starting and hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! Click here to register now!
Things were going great in this regard, until the entire ‘fake news’ epidemic hit causing Facebook to change their algorithm, and ultimately decide what information people have the right to access, without letting them examine sources and make up their own minds. That being said, there may be a bigger entity behind Facebook influencing its decisions, like the Federal Communication Commission, but who knows.
Censorship on information is at an all time high, and that’s no longer a secret. These days, we require more transparency, more information and more education with regards to teaching people how to think critically. We do not need more censorship, nor government/corporate authorities deciding for us what is real, what is fake, what is credible and what is not credible. We can do that ourselves.
At the end of the day, the biggest concern the citizenry seems to be having is with regards to their privacy. It’s no secret today that privacy doesn’t really exist, and intelligence agencies along with communications corporations have been collecting data on the global population through various means, one of them probably being Facebook. This type of data collecting and surveillance is justified by stating that it preserves national security, among other things.
As Edward Snowden (NSA whistle-blower) recently tweeted:
“Facebook makes their money by exploiting and selling intimate details about the private lives of millions, far beyond the scant details you voluntarily post. They are not victims, they are accomplices…Businesses that make money by collecting and selling detailed records of private lives were once plainly described as “surveillance companies.” Their rebranding as “social media” is the most successful deception since the Department of War became the Department of Defense.”
That being said, it’s not like this was secret information. It’s similar to the Snowden leaks, not many people out there were labelling mass surveillance as a ‘conspiracy theory,’ there was already enough information and evidence out there to make an educated guess about it. We’ve seen a similar thing happen with the UFO phenomenon, with its recent official disclosure by dozens of governments, along with the most recent footage released to the public by the Pentagon, we now know they are real, but many people knew beforehand. Why did they know before hand?
Because we don’t need the government/mainstream media to tell is something is true, before it’s considered true by the masses, we can think for ourselves. That’s an important point to remember, and it’s also important to keep in mind that information has been manipulated by mainstream media with regards to real events, for years.
I know it’s a different subject matter, but it’s a great example which is why I used it.
It’s also important to mention that we do have the opportunity to protect ourselves from social media data collection (see below), but at the same time, is it really necessary for a company to collect so much data on the user? Well, from a profit standpoint it is, because they sell this information to other companies. By collecting data, these corporations can see what we’re interested in, what we talk about, what sites we frequent, and more. It makes it really easy for them to target us and influence what we’re able to see, and what we’re not able to see, and target specific advertisements and information to us.
Furthermore, it was recently revealed that UK data analytics corporation, Cambridge Analytics, gained access the personal information of more than 50 million Facebook users in 2014, largely without their consent.
“Cambridge Analytica, a data analytics company, got access to more than 50 million Facebook users’ data in 2014. The data was overwhelmingly collected, shared, and stored without user consent. The scale of this violation of user privacy reflects how Facebook’s terms of service and API were structured at the time. Make no mistake: this was not a data breach. This was exactly how Facebook’s infrastructure was designed to work.” (source)
Chamath Palihapitiya, the vice-president for user growth at Facebook prior to leaving the company in 2011, said, “The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops that we created are destroying how society works. . . . No civil discourse, no cooperation, misinformation, mistruth.” You can read more about that here.
So not only are we being watched, we’re also being manipulated in a sense.
Facebook would be great without the data collection, as this type of data collection is completely unnecessary the same way that collecting mass amounts of info and watching the masses via NSA-type surveillance is not necessary, but we’re told it is.
I like to use the example of terrorism as well. If terrorism is state sponsored and a creation of the western military alliance, then how is that used as a justification for surveillance program, especially of the ‘war on terror’ is, “completely fabricated” and based on “false premises,” according to Canadian economist Dr. Michel Chossudovsky.
You can read more about that here.
At the end of the day, there seems to be some sort of entity, perhaps what’s now known as the ‘Deep State,’ pushing for an authoritarian type of human experience. America’s ruling elite’s ideology has long been neoliberalism and neoconservatism.
“Unlike traditional liberalism and conservatism, neoliberalism and neoconservatism are not opposites. Neoliberalism is just another name for transnational globalization, while neoconservatism is nothing other than the U.S.-dominated global empire project. They work together, two inhuman, anti-human processes that ensure a tiny minority of people control and own all the water, minerals, drugs, GM foods, and everything else worth owning in this world. Hillary Clinton, as the ultimate representative of such an agenda, received unwavering support from all segments of that establishment, certainly from the media. Trump, on the other hand, was vilified.” – Richard Dolan
I believe surveillance is one of multiple aspects of this agenda.
How To Change Your Facebook Settings To Opt Out of Platform API Sharing
Thanks to the Electronic Frontier Foundation for the information.
Log into Facebook and visit the App Settings page (or go there manually via the Settings Menu > Apps ).
From there, click the “Edit” button under “Apps, Websites and Plugins.” Click “Disable Platform.”
If you don’t want to disable the platform, click “Edit” under “Apps Others Use.” Then uncheck the types of information that you don’t want others’ apps to be able to access.
Based on my research into surveillance done by governments and intelligence agencies, the reasons never really seem to make sense. As mentioned above, with multiple examples, some of the reasons might even be completely fabricated. So, I encourage others to ask themselves, why? Why all of this data collection? Has Facebook, like most other high profiting corporations, simply collected data so they can sell it to other companies for huge amounts of money? Has the government intervened and used Facebook as another data collection method for their own purposes? Do they want to keep tabs on somebody that threatens the global elite’s plans in any sort of way? Or is it simply, again, all about money and finding out what we are all individually interested in? We could go on and on and speculate, but the bottom line is, it’s not a nice feeling to know that everything you say and do is recorded and stored somewhere in a massive data base. It’s not right, it infringes on multiple human rights, and it seems to be completely unnecessary and a tool used by the global elite for their own selfish purposes.
One thing is for certain, the world is changing, and we’re starting to finally acknowledge what’s going on behind the scenes instead of branding facts as ‘conspiracy’ theories simply because they go against our own belief systems.
Ultimately, we are the users of these platforms, and they are detrimental in several ways as they are helpful and positive. It’s up to you to make the decision whether you want to continue to use them.
Our Biology Responds To Events Before They Even Happen
- The Facts:
Multiple experiments have shown strong evidence for precognition in several different ways. One of them comes in the form of activity within the heart and the brain responding to events before they even happen.
- Reflect On:
Do we have extra human capacities we are unaware of? Perhaps we can learn them, develop them, and use them for good. Perhaps when the human race is ready, we will start learning more.
Is precognition real? There are many examples suggesting that yes, it is. The remote viewing program conducted by the CIA in conjunction with Stanford University was a good example of that. After its declassification in 1995, or at least partial declassification, the Department of Defense and those involved revealed an exceptionally high success rate:
To summarize, over the years, the back-and-forth criticism of protocols, refinement of methods, and successful replication of this type of remote viewing in independent laboratories has yielded considerable scientific evidence for the reality of the (remote viewing) phenomenon. Adding to the strength of these results was the discovery that a growing number of individuals could be found to demonstrate high-quality remote viewing, often to their own surprise… The development of this capability at SRI has evolved to the point where visiting CIA personnel with no previous exposure to such concepts have performed well under controlled laboratory conditions. (source)
The kicker? Part of remote viewing involves peering into future events as well as events that happened in the past.
It’s not only within the Department of Defense that we find this stuff, but a lot of science is emerging on this subject as well.
For example, a study (meta analysis) published in the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience titled “Predicting the unpredictable: critical analysis and practical implications of predictive anticipatory activity” examined a number of experiments regarding this phenomenon that were conducted by several different laboratories. These experiments indicate that the human body can actually detect randomly delivered stimuli that occur 1-10 seconds in advance. In other words, the human body seems to know of an event and reacts to the event before it has occurred. What occurs in the human body before these events are physiological changes that are measured regarding the cardiopulmonary, the skin, and the nervous system.
A few years ago, the chief scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, Dr. Dean Radin, visited the scientists over at HearthMath Institute and shared the results of one of his studies. Radin is also one of multiple scientists who authored the paper above. These studies, as mentioned above, tracked the autonomic nervous system, physiological changes, etc.
Scientists at HeartMath Institute (HMI) added more protocols, which included measuring participants’ brain waves (EEG), their hearts’ electrical activity (ECG), and their heart rate variability (HRV).
As HMI explains:
Twenty-six adults experienced in using HeartMath techniques and who could sustain a heart-coherent state completed two rounds of study protocols approximately two weeks apart. Half of the participants completed the protocols after they intentionally achieved a heart-coherent state for 10 minutes. The other half completed the same procedures without first achieving heart coherence. Then they reversed the process for the second round of monitoring, with the first group not becoming heart-coherent before completing the protocols and the second group becoming heart-coherent before. The point was to test whether heart coherence affected the results of the experiment.
Participants were told the study’s purpose was to test stress reactions and were unaware of its actual purpose. (This practice meets institutional-review-board standards.) Each participant sat at a computer and was instructed to click a mouse when ready to begin.
The screen stayed blank for six seconds. The participant’s physiological data was recorded by a special software program, and then, one by one, a series of 45 pictures was displayed on the screen. Each picture, displayed for 3 seconds, evoked either a strong emotional reaction or a calm state. After each picture, the screen went blank for 10 seconds. Participants repeated this process for all 45 pictures, 30 of which were known to evoke a calm response and 15 a strong emotional response.
The results of the experiment were fascinating to say the least. The participants’ brains and hearts responded to information about the emotional quality of the pictures before the computer flashed them (random selection). This means that the heart and brain were both responding to future events. The results indicated that the responses happened, on average, 4.8 seconds before the computer selected the pictures.
How mind-altering is that?
Even more profound, perhaps, was data showing the heart received information before the brain. “It is first registered from the heart,” Rollin McCraty Ph.D. explained, “then up to the brain (emotional and pre-frontal cortex), where we can logically relate what we are intuiting, then finally down to the gut (or where something stirs).”
Another significant study (meta-analysis) that was published in Journal of Parapsychology by Charles Honorton and Diane C. Ferrari in 1989 examined a number of studies that were published between 1935 and 1987. The studies involved individuals’ attempts to predict “the identity of target stimuli selected randomly over intervals ranging from several hundred million seconds to one year following the individuals responses.” These authors investigated over 300 studies conducted by over 60 authors, using approximately 2 million individual trials by more than 50,000 people. (source)
It concluded that their analysis of precognition experiments “confirms the existence of a small but highly significant precognition effect. The effect appears to be repeatable; significant outcomes are reported by 40 investigators using a variety of methodological paradigms and subject populations. The precognition effect is not merely an unexplained departure from a theoretical chance baseline, but rather is an effect that covaries with factors known to influence more familiar aspects of human performance.” (source)
“There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field will be tarnished by studying a phenomenon that is tainted by its association with superstition, spiritualism and magic. Protecting against this possibility sometimes seems more important than encouraging scientific exploration or protecting academic freedom. But this may be changing.”
– Cassandra Vieten, PhD and President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (source)
We are living in a day and age where new information and evidence are constantly emerging, challenging what we once thought was real or what we think we know about ourselves as human beings. It’s best to keep an open mind. Perhaps there are aspects of ourselves and our consciousness that have yet to be discovered. Perhaps if we learn and grow from these studies, they can help us better ourselves and others.
The 5G Health Summit Starts Tomorrow (June 1st) – Reserve Your Free Spot Here
- The Facts:
A global online summit featuring doctors, scientists & activists addressing the health concerns of 5G technology and what people can do about it is set to take place the first week of June and it's free to sign up.
- Reflect On:
Why are safety concerns that've been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals called a "conspiracy theory?" Why is this idea ridiculed? Why don't our federal health regulatory agencies simply to some health safety testing before rolling it out?
Some of the world’s leading scientists, doctors and activists are gathering for a free online summit that begins on Monday June 1st and will run for approximately one week. The summit will dive into the health concerns of 5G technology, and why it’s a concern and what people can do about it. The summit is completely free to sign up and watch, and you can do so here.
We’ve also put together an E-book titled “Is 5G Safe? An Easy to Understand Guide” summarizing the published peer-reviewed research that is raising concerns about electromagnetic radiation that’s emitted from our favourite wireless devices, cell phones and more, as well as novel 5G technology. It’s a great resource that you can share with family or friends who desire to look at the proof, research, evidence and concerns that thousands of doctors and scientists have been and are creating awareness about all over the globe. We wrote it in language designed to be simple and factual.
Once you sign up for the summit, you get access to the free E-book.
It’s quite strange that any researched journalist could dismiss the health concerns of 5G technology, as well as 4G and 3G, when there are nearly 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies that raise cause for concern. A study published in 2019 in Frontiers in Public Health is one of many that raises concerns about 5G technology, explaining how there is no safety testing, and that in vivo and in vitro studies regarding this type of technology and it’s predecessors have shown that it’s harmful to human health, even at levels below current “safety” limits.
At the end of the day, whether you believe this type of technology is safe or you don’t, would it not be in the best interests of everybody to have the technology go through some type of required safety testing? Shouldn’t any technology that has any sort of biological effect be put through safety testing? Why has there not been any safety testing?
In December 2018, US. Senator Richard Blumenthal and U.S. Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr seeking answers regarding potential health risks posed by new 5G wireless technology. At a hearing, that took place last year, Blumenthal criticized Carr for failing to provide answers, and did the same thing to other industry representatives that were in attendance for not putting the technology through safety testing. You can watch a clip of that hearing and read more about it, here.
How can our federal health regulatory agencies approve products that are clearly a cause for concern?
This is why the summit is going to be such a great resource. It will answer many questions, and again, let people know what they can do about it!
Sign up for the free 5G Summit starting June 1st. Hear from 40 of the world’s leading experts on the subject, all FREE! Click here to register now!
Dr. Buttar Reveals Declassified Government Report Related to 5G Dangers
- The Facts:
Dr. Rashid Butter discusses a declassified report on millimetre wave technology and the effects it has on human health. These are the same waves used in 5G technology.
- Reflect On:
If we already know these waves cause harm to human health, why do we use them in airport scanners? Why are we about to roll out an entire wireless network based on these technologies?
People often say 5G hasn’t been tested, and to some extent that is true. But given 5G uses millimetre wave technology and that technology has been studied for quite some time, it has obviously been tested by those who have worked on them. So why hasn’t this information been widely released? Why are we not looking at the available data on millimetre wave technology as it relates to 5G?
Recently we came across 7 Russian studies that were summarized in a report declassified through the CIA. These studies were declassified in 2012 and marked “For Goverment Use Only.” From what you can gather very quickly in this report, the conclusions should shut down 5G rollout instantly. At least until someone can show, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this technology is safe.
Let’s have a quick look at how this report was concluded:
“Thus the conducted investigations indicate high biological activity and an unfavourable influence of millimeter radiowaves on the organism. The expression of the biological reactions increased with an increase of the period of iridation and depended on individual characteristics of the organism.”
What this translates to in plain English is, millimetre-wave frequencies do affect the human body negatively, and the longer the exposure, the more damage that occurs. Since 5G uses millimetre waves and is set to push a constant barrage of frequency on humans anywhere they go, this would mean sustained wave exposure, and thus inevitable biological damage.
Incredibly, these are the same wave technologies used in airport fully body scanners that we have been raising awareness about for years. It’s important to note, you CAN opt out of going through those scanners.
Dr. Rashid Buttar has given an incredible interview where he goes page by page as to exactly what this declassified CIA research reveals. The report summarizes 7 studies on the effects of millimeter-wave radiation levels between 37-60GHz. These levels are “safe” according to government, but that is NOT what the science says.
As we have said for the last year and a half, now is a potent time to understand the dangers of 5G and work to stop its rollout. This interview is a must listen. Click here to watch Dr. Rashid Buttar’s interview.
As we can tell in our world right now, a ton of truth is coming to the surface, the environment to create change is ripe. If we can stay grounded, in our hearts and avoid descending into hate, we can TRULY make a big difference here.
Dr. Buttar Reveals Declassified Government Report Related to 5G Dangers
People often say 5G hasn’t been tested, and to some extent that is true. But given 5G uses millimetre wave...
University Mathematician Decodes The Crop Circle With A Binary Code & Extraterrestrial Face
Did you know that crop circles are actually real? How they’re made and who or what is making them is...