- The Facts:
Prince Andrew's recent interview with the BBC was filled with hard to believe claims of innocence from the Prince.
- Reflect On:
Was this interview conducted in order to isolate Prince Andrew from the way the rest of the Royal Family is perceived?
Good lord. It felt like listening to a 5-year old boy denying that he had raided the candy jar, all while surreptitiously licking away the chocolate stains from around his mouth. The only difference is that, while the guilty child usually gives up quickly on his obvious ruse, Prince Andrew’s recent interview with the BBC lasted almost an hour, and he proclaimed his innocence right to the end.
I watched the whole thing, mainly because I was waiting for him to say a single credible thing that would give me the slightest reason to believe his outright claims that he knew nothing about Jeffrey Epstein’s penchant for young girls, and that he had nothing to do with Virginia Roberts Guiffre and in fact didn’t even know who she was.
--> High Quality CBD Our friends at PuraThrive worked with industry experts to create one of the most bioavailable CBD extracts possible. Get yours today before it runs out. Click here to learn more.
Alas, I was not moved by a single word he said. I include the full interview below in case anyone wants to wade through it and fish out something credible to prove me wrong.
A New Era For Royalty
In a way, you can’t really blame Andrew for offering such unsubstantiated denials, which careened between flat statements that the events in question did not happen and rambling exhortations that he does not remember those same events. As a member of the Royal Family, he has never been forced to justify his actions his whole life (except perhaps in private to his mother the Queen). Out in public if he said something was so, then all those around him would take it to be gospel. And very much like official Royal Family proclamations, which effectively have been treated as the ‘last word’ on a given subject in society for centuries, he somehow still seems to feel that sense of entitlement, that if it comes out of his mouth then at least his loyalists will regard it as true.
We are, however, in a new era. This signs are now obvious. And credit interviewer Emily Maitlis with bringing this point up near the end of the interview:
EM: I know we have to bring this to a close because we’re running out of time. You’ve faced questions today on a very, very raw subject. There has never been an interview like this before, I wonder what that tells us about the way the Royal Family now confronts these difficult situations. Has there been a sea change?
PA: I think the problem that I’m… we face in the 21st Century is social media. There is a whole range of things that you face now that you didn’t face 25 years ago because it was just the print media.
I mean there are all sorts of things that are on the internet and out there in the public domain that we just sort of go, “Well, yeah,” but I’m afraid is… it just never happened.
There is probably something to what Prince Andrew is saying here. Social media and the internet in general, in which information such as the picture of him with his arm around Virginia Roberts’ waist with Ghislaine Maxwell in the background is able to widely proliferate, simply makes it more difficult for people who do bad things to hide the evidence and control the narrative than it was during earlier times with a complicit print-only media. When he says his problem is social media, he is implying it is easy for people to make stuff up. But what it really means is that he cannot as easily indulge in illegal and immoral activity in the era of social media.
But it isn’t just the internet. That picture and the knowledge of Prince Andrew’s chummy relationship with Jeff Epstein have been floating around the internet for over a decade. Suddenly, within the last year or two, we seem to have entered firmly into an era of accountability, in which the public has become more aware, conscious, and inquisitive about what is going on. Not the entire public, but a critical enough mass of people such that former ‘untouchables’ like Prince Andrew have to address rumors of wrongdoing that are no longer being swept away by the next news cycle. He almost admits as much himself when explaining his decision to speak out:
Choosing to, as it were, get out there and talk about these things, it’s almost… it’s almost a mental health issue to some extent for me in the sense that it’s been nagging at my mind for a great many years.
I could go on and poke holes in just about every response he gave to try to counter known facts, sworn affidavits and other witness testimony of where he was, when, and with who, but even mainstream media has gotten in on the incredulity of his argument, where he will often categorically say that he ‘was not there’ or ‘did not do that,’ but would not go so far as to say that the person who says he did is not telling the truth, like in this exchange:
EM: Another guest was John Brockman, the literary agent. Now, he described seeing you there getting a foot massage from a young Russian woman, did that happen?
EM: You’re absolutely sure or you can’t remember?
PA: Yeah, I’m absolutely sure.
EM: So John Brockman’s statement is false?
PA: I wouldn’t… I wouldn’t… I don’t know Mr Brockman so I don’t know what he’s talking about.
I have to put this last exchange up, simply because I found it so entertaining. In response to Virginia Roberts Guiffre’s vivid account of the evening of March 10th, 2001 which she said they spent together, Andrew spins a number of interesting reasons why her account just could not be so, including that he does not drink, that he suffered from a war injury that would have prevented him from sweating at that time, and that he specifically remembers taking his daughter Beatrice to a pizza party that day:
EM: Virginia Roberts has made allegations against you. She says she met you in 2001, she says she dined with you, danced with you at Tramp Nightclub in London. She went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell, your friend. Your response?
PA: I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.
EM: You don’t remember meeting her?
EM: She says she met you in 2001, she dined with you, she danced with you, you bought her drinks, you were in Tramp Nightclub in London and she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell.
PA: It didn’t happen.
EM: Do you remember her?
PA: No, I’ve no recollection of ever meeting her, I’m almost, in fact I’m convinced that I was never in Tramps with her. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story, one of which is that I don’t know where the bar is in Tramps. I don’t drink, I don’t think I’ve ever bought a drink in Tramps whenever I was there.
EM: Do you remember dancing at Tramp?
PA: No, that couldn’t have happened because the date that’s being suggested I was at home with the children.
EM: You know that you were at home with the children, was it a memorable night?
PA: On that particular day that we now understand is the date which is the 10th of March, I was at home, I was with the children and I’d taken Beatrice to a Pizza Express in Woking for a party at I suppose sort of 4:00 or 5:00 in the afternoon. And then because the duchess was away, we have a simple rule in the family that when one is away the other one is there. I was on terminal leave at the time from the Royal Navy so therefore I was at home.
EM: Why would you remember that so specifically? Why would you remember a Pizza Express birthday and being at home?
PA: Because going to Pizza Express in Woking is an unusual thing for me to do, a very unusual thing for me to do. I’ve never been… I’ve only been to Woking a couple of times and I remember it weirdly distinctly. As soon as somebody reminded me of it, I went, “Oh yes, I remember that.” But I have no recollection of ever meeting or being in the company or the presence.
EM: So you’re absolutely sure that you were at home on the 10th March?
EM: She was very specific about that night, she described dancing with you.
EM: And you profusely sweating and that she went on to have a bath possibly.
PA: There’s a slight problem with the sweating because I have a peculiar medical condition which is that I don’t sweat or I didn’t sweat at the time and that was… was it… yes, I didn’t sweat at the time because I had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenalin in the Falkland’s War when I was shot at and I simply… it was almost impossible for me to sweat. And it’s only because I have done a number of things in the recent past that I am starting to be able to do that again. So I’m afraid to say that there’s a medical condition that says that I didn’t do it so therefore…
EM: Is it possible that you met Virginia Roberts, dined with her, danced with her in Tramp, had sex with her on another date?
EM: Do you remember meeting her at all?
EM: Do you know you didn’t meet her or do you just not remember meeting her?
PA: No, I have… I don’t know if I’ve met her but no, I have no recollection of meeting her.
EM: Because she was very specific, she described the dance that you had together in Tramp. She described meeting you, she was a 17-year-old girl meeting a senior member of the Royal Family.
PA: It never happened.
It’s just amazing that he claims to remember vivid details about his ‘exculpatory evidence’ of driving his daughter to a pizza party on a particular date, but claims not to remember a woman he was in a picture with and says he had sex with her on several occasions. One is left to ask why Prince Andrew would go ahead and attend this interview, given how lame and unsubstantial he must have known his denials would be.
The Real Purpose Of The Interview
There is only one reasonable explanation for Prince Andrew conducting the interview in the way that he did: he was ordered to do it by his mother Queen Elizabeth. As damaging as Prince Andrew’s behavior has been in terms of being an embarrassing rogue within the Royal Family, it has the potential to be far more damaging. There could be a fear that growing numbers of people will put the pieces together and conclude that the entire Royal Family, and by extension Royal Families and Nobility all around the world, have long been involved not only in the things that Prince Andrew appears to have been involved in. Worse, people might begin to give more credence to testimony that Royalty have long been involved not only in human trafficking and the rape of underaged girls, but also Satanic Ritual Abuses such as pedophilia, torture, human sacrifice, and cannibalism.
If you go through the interview, you will notice one thing that Andrew is careful to do is to deflect any sense of responsibility or blame away from the Royal Family, or any advisors, and puts the ‘blame’ squarely on himself–though his self-blame is limited to his 2010 visit to Epstein, during which he spent a number of days at the mansion of the known sex offender. He tried his best to frame that visit as an in-person break-up of the friendship that he alone decided to do, noting that it would have been ‘chicken’ of him to end the friendship over the phone.
EM: Who advised you then that it was a good idea to go and break up the friendship? Did that come from the palace, was Her Majesty, the Queen involved?
PA: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, that came from… so there were a number of people who… so some people from my staff, some people from friends and family I was talking to and I took the decision that it was I had to show leadership and I had to go and see him and I had to tell him, “That’s it.”
And he was clear to distinguish his own personal family’s struggles with this issue from the Royal Family’s:
EM: Has the episode been damaging to the Royal Family, to Her Majesty the Queen?
PA: I don’t believe it’s been damaging to the Queen at all.
It’s subtle, but the overall impact of the interview is that Prince Andrew appears as some kind of lying buffoon who is not willing to admit any of his embarrassing indiscretions. The Royal Family, on the other hand, while allegedly being supportive for the prince as a person, are preemptively seen in the guise of righteous, disapproving parents if any of these activities turn out to be true as the majority of the public suspect. The perception of the Royal Family as an institution that embodies proper moral conduct, then, is far more important here than public impressions of one wayward prince.
One of the prime strategies of all large power factions that operate in the world is to ‘prune’ the branches that reveal the inherent immorality of the whole so that the tree is preserved and not tainted by the sagging branch. Prince Andrew is the latest powerful scapegoat to be thrust out into the spotlight, and it appears to be a sign that we are getting ever closer to unveiling the heart of the beast itself, which would constitute a major step in our liberation.
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
COVID-19 Survival Rates Have Many Scientists/Doctors Questioning Masks & Lockdown
- The Facts:
All restrictions on restaurants and other business in Florida have been lifted, and so have local fines against people who refuse to wear masks after the CDC released new survival rates.
- Reflect On:
Why are opinions and narratives that oppose the WHO being censored, ridiculed, and largely ignored? Why aren't they discussed openly and transparently?
What Happened: Florida Governor Ron DeSantis recently lifted all restrictions on restaurants and other business in Florida and banned local fines against people who refuse to wear masks. He did so after showing new statistics just released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) showing very high survival rates, as you can see from the picture picture above. The CDC has a page on their website titled “Covid-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios.” According to them, “Each scenario is based on a set of numerical values for biological and epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 illness, which is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These values—called parameter values—can be used in models to estimate the possible effects of COVID-19 in U.S. states and localities. That’s where the numbers come from.
Questioning Lockdown & Masks, A Theme From The Very Beginning: The world’s leading scientists in the field and from other fields have been questioning lockdown measures from the very beginning of this pandemic, due to the fact that many of them believe and have believed that we are dealing with a virus similar, and even less severe than viruses that have been circling the globe for decades, infecting hundreds of millions and killings tens of millions of people every single year.
For example, did you know that metapneumovirus has been shown to have worldwide circulation with nearly universal infection by age 5? Did you know that outbreaks of metapneumovirus have been well documented every single year, especially in long term care facilities with mortality rates of up to 50%? () Did you know that human metapneumovirus infection results in a large number of hospitalizations of children every single year? Did you know it has a substantial morbidity rate, again in the elderly, but also among children as well? Did you know nearly 1-2 million children every single year die of these types of respiratory illnesses because they lead to acute respiratory illness? (source)
At the beginning of the pandemic, multiple professors from Stanford criticized the World Health Organization for creating unnecessary fear and hysteria.
They make it quite clear that if the projections being given by the World Health Organization are correct, then “the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified.” But they also make the point that “there’s little evidence to confirm that premise – and projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.” It turns out that they were right.
John P. A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology, recently published an article entitled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data.“ In the article, he also argues that there is simply not enough data to make claims about reported case fatality rate.
He stated that rates, “like the official 3.4% rate from the World Health Organization, cause horror — and are meaningless. He was right. Prior to the recent CDC update, he emphasized that the infection fatality rate is close to 0 percent for people under the age of 45 years old.
Michael Levitt, a Biophysicist and a professor of structural biology at Stanford University, criticized the WHO as well as Facebook for censoring different information and informed perspectives regarding the Coronavirus. This is another strong point, why are/were social media outlets censoring information and opinions that did not match that which was given by the WHO? These actions have only raised more eyebrows, as we now have a digital authoritarian Orwellian “fact-checker”
patrolling the internet.
Almost all of the science we were hearing, for example like organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) was wrong…This has been a disgraceful situation for science..Reports were released openly, shared by email, and all I got back was abuse. And you got to see that everything I said in that first six weeks was actually true and for political reasons, we as scientists let our views be corrupted. The data had very clear things to say. Nobody said to be “let me check your numbers” they all just said “stop talking like that.” – Levitt
When Dr. Ron Paul shared his opinion a few months ago that “People should ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic” he was censored and marked as false news, having his social media distribution limited.
More than 500 German doctors & scientists have signed on as representatives of an organization called the “Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee” to investigate what’s happening on our planet with regards to COVID-19, expressing the same sentiment. They came together to investigate the severity of the virus, and whether or not the actions taken by governments around the world, and in this case the German government, are justified and not causing more harm than good.
You can access the full english transcripts on the organizations website if interested.
This group has been giving multiple conferences in Germany, in one of the most recent, Dr. Heiko Schöning, one of the organizations leaders, stated that “We have a lot of evidence that it (the new coronavirus) is a fake story all over the world.” To put it in context, he wasn’t referring to the virus being fake, but simply that it’s no more dangerous than the seasonal flu (or just as dangerous) and that there is no justification for the measures being taken to combat it. You can read more about the story here.
Another example would be a recent report published in the British Medical Journal has suggested that quarantine measures in the United Kingdom as a result of the new coronavirus may have already killed more UK seniors than the coronavirus has during the peak of the virus.
Are masks even effective? Many studies claim yes, but many also claim no.
Many scientists and doctors in North America are also expressing the same sentiments. For example, The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) recently published a report titled “Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) Compares COVID-19 to Previous Seasonal and Pandemic Flu Periods.” According to them, the infection/fatality rate of COVID-19 is 0.26%. You can read more about that and access their resources and reasoning here.
Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a specialist in microbiology and one of the most cited research scientists in German history is also part of Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee mentioned above and has also expressed the same thing, multiple times early on in the pandemic all the way up to today.
Implementation of the current draconian measures that are so extremely restrict fundamental rights can only be justified if there is reason to fear that a truly, exceptionally dangerous virus is threatening us. Do any scientifically sound data exist to support this contention for COVID-19? I assert that the answer is simply, no. – Bhakdi. You can read more about him here.
And there is the issue of exaggerated death counts. For example, Toronto Public Health tweeted in late June that “Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19, are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.” There are multiple examples from different countries. You can read more about that here.
Vittorio Sgarbi, Italian politician Mayor of Sutri, gave an emotional speech at a hearing on the 24th of April where he emphasized that the number of deaths in Italy due to COVID-19 are completely false and that the people are being lied to. You can watch that and read more about it here.
A chemistry professor at the University of Waterloo has distributed a course outline to students, saying his in-class exams aren’t mandatory “because of the COVID fake emergency.” Ronald B. Brown, Ph.D., from the School of Public Health and Health Systems at the University of Waterloo recently stated that the COVID-19 fatality rate is the “worst miscalculation in the history of humanity.” Brown is currently completing his second doctorate degree, this time in epidemiology at the University of Waterloo. Not long ago, Brown published a paper in Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, titled “Public health lessons learned from biases in coronavirus mortality overestimation.”
Below is a statement Brown recently gave to John C. A. Manley, a journalist who was the first to cover the story:
The subject of this article is disruptive, to say the least, although it is not as obvious from the title. The manuscript cites the smoking-gun, documented evidence showing that the public’s overreaction to the coronavirus pandemic was based on the worst miscalculation in the history of humanity, in my opinion. My manuscript underwent an intensive peer-review process. You are the first media guy who has responded to my invitation.
The examples above aren’t even the tip of the ice-berg, but they are ones I’ve used many times in previous articles. I am posting them above just to hammer home the point.
Why This Is Important: This information is important because it highlights that the measures we are being mandated & forced to take are being done using flawed data to justify it. What also has more people concerned is that the opinions and research of many doctors and scientists around the world, some of them quite renowned, are being banned and censored from social media platforms for simply contradicting the information given to us by the World Health Organization (WHO). Why are people like Julian Assange really in jail? Why are people exposing war crimes and other misdoings within the WHO, as Assange has, punished, and the ones committing the actual crimes are the ones we identify with? Should we not have the right to examine information openly and freely, and determine for ourselves what is and what isn’t? A common theme with regards to this pandemic seems to be using fear and hysteria to make the threat seem much greater than it actually is, and then to propose the solution. Perhaps Edward Snowden was right when he said that governments are using the coronavirus to take away more of our rights and freedoms, and they won’t come back, just as they didn’t come back after 9/11. Is there anybody politically and financially gaining from this pandemic? What’s going on here?
At the end of the day, we have to keep asking ourselves if our designated government and global health authorities actually have our best interests at hand. If not, why do we continue to support it?
There are many examples that show these institutions do not work to make humanity thrive, but instead oppress humanity. When it comes to the World Health Organization (WHO) for example, Wikileaks exposed how much they are influenced by pharmaceutical companies. Vimeo also recently completely banned a documentary that exposed the same thing. That particular documentary featured many scientists, doctors and even officials from within the WHO.
It’s quite clear to many that government doesn’t really put the citizens it claims to represent first, but instead corporations and big money. So why do we constantly listen to their advice? Why do we constantly rely on them for truth and information? Why do we rely on them for guidance? Would we not be better off determining for ourselves what is appropriate, especially in the face of such controversial times when so much is being exposed?
Is it time humanity becomes self-governed? Is it time we steep away from the need for such parental figures like government? It seems like we are currently in the process of doing this, with many of us beginning to awaken. Collectively, we will be creating a new world, that matches a consciousness of self-governance, and the key is to operate from a place of oneness and peace within, which is a journey of awakening to who we truly are, as opposed to what we have been taught to think. We are in a time of a consciousness renaissance.
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
Extraordinary Children Who Can Do “Impossible” Things: A Documented Reality
- The Facts:
A document archived in the CIA's electronic reading room written by a University Professor details the reality of children, and adults, who have gifted abilities in the area of parapsychology.
- Reflect On:
Why has this kind of phenomena been ridiculed in the mainstream, yet vigorously and secretively studied at the highest levels of government?
Cassandra Vieten, PhD and current President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), which was founded by astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, could not have put it any better. She said, “There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field (science) will be tarnished by studying 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.”
The statement above is true, for years discoveries have been rejected simply because they are big time paradigm busters. No matter how much truth, validity and scientific backing they have, the simple fact that they conflict with long held belief systems is enough to brush them off. It’s great to see this changing, because it’s important to expand human consciousness, which is done so by pushing the boundaries of what we think we know and discovering new concepts of our reality that we once thought held no validity, but actually do.
How much scientific validity do topics like psychokinesis, clairvoyance, telepathy and remote viewing (all fit under the umbrella of parapsychology) have? Here is a great quote from Dr. Jessica Utts, the Chair of the Department of Statistics at the University of California, Irvine and a professor there since 2008.
“What convinced me was just the evidence, the accumulating evidence as I worked in this field and I got to see more and more of the evidence. I visited the laboratories, even beyond where I was working to see what they were doing and I could see that they had really tight controls…And so I got convinced by the good science that I saw being done. And in fact I will say as a statistician I’ve consulted in a lot of different areas of science; the methodology and the controls on these experiments are tighter than any other area of science where I’ve worked.” (source)
China’s Psychic Children
Are there psychic children in China? It’s hard to believe that there are not after one dives into the documentation that’s been made available through the long process of declassification, or by Freedom of Information Act (FIOA) requests. One can simply examine the science of parapsychology alone and come to the conclusion that yes, something significant is going on here when it comes to the phenomena within the realm of parapsychology.
Not only is this type of phenomenon being reported today, but it’s been throughout history and across many cultures, this is evident in ancient literature, from the Vedic texts and the yoga sutras, to Jesus, Moses, Milarepa, Mohammed and more. Again, modern day evidence is suggesting that these abilities are much more than folklore.
One interesting article/document I cam across is titled “China’s Psychic Savants.” I accessed it from the CIA’s electronic reading room. It’s a document that was written by Marcel Truzzi, a former professor at Eastern Michigan University and founding co-chairman of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), and a founder of the Society for Scientific Exploration.
The introduction provides a good background of the lore from China regarding this phenomenon,
Eleven-year-old Tang Yu and his friend Chen Xioming were on their way home from school in the remote mountain village of Dazhu County when they began to wrestle. Tang brushed against Chen’s coat pocket, the story goes, and had the sudden vision of two Chinese symbols. He described the vivid symbols to Chen, who pulled a package of Flying Wild Goose cigarettes from his pocket. The label on the side of the package, the boys reported, consisted of the two symbols Tan Yu had “seen.”
Tang Yu was reluctant to share his discovery with Tang Keming, his fifty-year-old peasant father. He knew his claim would sound like a lie. Instead, he began to play guessing games with the villagers. He asked them to write random characters on pieces of paper, crumple the paper into balls, and let him hold each ball in turn next to his ear. Tang then guessed the message within, his guesses, it was said, always proved right. Word of the boy spread beyond his small town to all the Sichuan province in central China.
Soon the region’s science commission and its bureau of education and culture had asked to examine Tang, and researchers there confirmed his ability to identify words and colours on small wads of paper held to his ear. News reporters and awe-struck officials of the Sichuan Provincial Party Committee quickly backed those results, and on March 11, 1979, this remarkable tale was published in Sichuan Daily.
Truzzi goes on,
Reports began coming in about children with powers of telepathy, clairvoyance, X-ray vision, and psychokinesis. The typical child was between the ages of nine and fourteen, but a few were as young as four or as old as twenty-five; and it was estimated by Feng Hua, a traditional Chinese physician, that there were about 2,000 such gifted children within the Chinese population of 1 billion.
By early 1980 these remarkable children had made their way to the pages of China’s prestigious Nature Journal. And that February the surge of interest prompted Nature Journal to sponsor a huge conference – the First Science Symposium on the Extraordinary Function of the Human Body – for participants from more than 20 colleges and medical schools. The proceedings were filmed by the Shanghai Science and Education Studio, and the film, called Do You Believe It? was shown over national television to millions of Chinese.
He then goes on to describe a number of cases and examples, it’s quite interesting, but there are many to choose from beyond this specific document that provide great examples. The facts Truzzi write about here were were also outlined in a declassified US Air Force report on teleportation, which was made available through the Federation of American Scientists. That document also touches upon China’s psychic children, mentioning, in this case, the ones that were able to teleport full objects from one location to another without touching them.
Another one, titled “Research into Paranormal Ability To Break Through Spatial Barriers” touches upon the same thing, and also provides multiple examples of children and people being video tapped and documented, under double blind conditions, being able to do the same thing. This particular document, which was declassified through a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA), outlines specific people with very special abilities and how they’ve been studied by thousands of scientists and governments around the world for a very long time.
Pretty intriguing, isn’t it?
It’s very interesting that studies regarding parapsychological phenomenon have been conducted at the highest levels of government, particularly within the defense department of multiple countries, with successful results. A great example from the United States was the remote viewing program, remote viewing refers to the ability to perceive a remote location other that the one the individual is located in, regardless of distance.
The success of this program is outlined in a statement made by Dr. Hal Puthoff from a paper published after the program’s declassification in 1995:
“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)(source)
Parapsychology is truly a consciousness expanding field that can really open up our minds to aspects of our reality that have, and continue to go largely ignored. There is much more to us as human beings than we’ve been made to believe, and if we stop, think, and do some research, it’s not hard to see how something significant has been overlooked.
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
Hunter Biden Allegedly Linked To An Eastern European Human Trafficking Ring
- The Facts:
Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden Family have been tied to an Eastern European human trafficking ring, according to a report recently released by Senate Republicans
- Reflect On:
How rampant is elite level human/child trafficking? Why was this once considered a "conspiracy theory" despite all of the evidence that has existed for many years that this activity is costing a lot of people/children their lives?
What Happened: Hunter Biden, the son of presidential candidate Joe Biden, apparently sent thousands of dollars to individuals allegedly involved in sex trafficking, according to a report recently released by Senate Republicans. According the report, Biden “has sent funds to non-resident alien women in the United States who are citizens of Russia and Ukraine and who have subsequently wired funds they have received from Hunter Biden to individuals located in Russia and Ukraine…The records also note that some of these transactions are linked to what “appears to be an Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.”
According to the New York Post, “The allegations are contained in a footnote to a section of the report that details potential “criminal concerns and extortion threats” involving Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden family”
Republican Rep. Jim Jordan on Thursday demanded answers from FBI Director Christopher Wray on what investigative steps the bureau has taken related to Hunter Biden’s business dealings in the wake of the new report.
Why This Is Important: The trafficking of women and children has received a lot more attention in light of Jeffrey Epstein’s activities receiving more transparency. Multiple high ranking politicians have been implicated even well before the world was aware of Jeffrey Epstein, and information is constantly surfacing.
For example, Not long ago, I wrote about how Congress is now looking at a bipartisan bill to stop employees from sharing child porn on Department of Defense computers. More than one hundred high ranking Department of Defense and Pentagon employees were implicated. You can read more about that here.
When it comes to politicians, the Royal Family, The Vatican and more, Collective Evolution has also covered that in great detail. If you’d like to read about more examples and go more in-depth, you can refer to this article, and this article, among many others on our website.
Our Interview With A Survivor of Elite Level Child Sex Trafficking/Ritual Abuse:
One of the main reasons we keep covering the this topic is to draw attention to our interview with a survivor of child sex trafficking. The phenomenon is much deeper than what we are getting from the mainstream, and goes into mind control, brainwashing, ritual abuse, pedophilia, blackmail, murder, torture, organ harvesting and more.
The interview is with Anneke Lucas, who is is an author, speaker, advocate for child sex trafficking victims, founder of the non-profit organization Liberation Prison Yoga, and creator of the Unconditional Model. Her work is based on personal experience of a 30-year healing journey after surviving being sold by her family as a very young child sex slave to an elite level pedophile network.
The interview is deep, and goes into the consciousness aspect of her experience and why that aspect is so important.
You can access the full interview and start your free trial HERE on CETV, a platform we created to help combat internet censorship and allow us to continue to do our work and get the word out about various issues and topics.
The Takeaway: At the end of the day we have to ask ourselves, how many of our ‘leaders’ and people who have been made out to be idols, in places like the Vatican and more are involved in this type of thing. For this type of abuse to take place, especially with children, shows a great lack of empathy and morality, so I ask you, are those who are making major decisions for our planet lacking the same? Is the activity they engage simply a glimpse into the overall feelings these people have for human life? Do they really care about us, or do they simply want to use us, control us, and continue manipulating our perception of major global events so we obey their orders? Does voting really make a difference, or does it simply perpetuate a system that’s extremely corrupt that chance of meaningful change can come from it? Are we giving our power away as a citizenry when we continue to rely on ‘elected leaders’ instead of taking matters into our own hands? Do these people truly care about the well being of humanity and planet Earth, or are we simply allowing ourselves to be ‘had’ every four years?
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
“We Have A Lot of Evidence That It’s A Fake Story All Over The World” – German Doctors on COVID-19
Is this article ‘fake news?’ No, because the statement in the title that reads “we have a lot of evidence...
COVID-19 Survival Rates Have Many Scientists/Doctors Questioning Masks & Lockdown
What Happened: Florida Governor Ron DeSantis recently lifted all restrictions on restaurants and other business in Florida and banned local fines...