Sunday Talks – Former Secretary of State John Kerry Explains Intent of Next Administration to Eliminate First Amendment


Posted originally on the CTH onSeptember 29, 2024 | Sundance

Comrades, I’m really glad to see former Secretary of State and Climate Czar, John Kerry, outline the transparent truth of their intention in such a matter-of-fact way.   Trust me, this is a really good thing. Perhaps no 2-minute encapsulation of current events more accurately outlines the worldview of the Biden-Harris administration, than this one.

Within the recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlines how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information.  Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, presumably in his hope Kamala Harris, will forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.

Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests.  Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology.  Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control.  Yes, this is said quite openly.  This is the mindset of those in power.  WATCH: 

.

On another positive note, millions of people now accurately understand why it is so important to refute the terms “mis-dis-mal information.”  When CTH initially warned about the labeling, most people did not understand; however, as the consequences begin to surface, I would argue almost a majority of people now understand.

2022: CTH encountered criticism for our position on information.  Perhaps it is important to step back and explain exactly why we should not be playing by rules, like those proposed by John Kerry, which are established to control us while engaged in the battle of ideas.  First, my position:

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… 

There is only information.

There are only two elements within the public discussion of information, truth and not truth.

In an era filled with “fact-checkers” and institutional guardians at the gates of Big Tech, let me explain exactly why it is important not to accept the speech rules of the guards.

When you accept the terms “disinformation”, “misinformation” or the newest lingo, “malinformation,” you are beginning to categorize truth and lies in various shades.  You are merging black and white, right and wrong, into various shades of grey.

When your mind works in the grey zone, you are, by direct and factual consequence, saying there is a problem.  You are correct; however, this is where people may make a mistake. The problem is supposed to be there.

It is not a solution to the problem to try and remove the grey simply because it takes too much work to separate the white pixels from the black ones.  You were born with a gift, the greatest gift a loving God could provide.  You were born with a brain and set of natural instincts that are tools to do this pixel separation, use them.

If you define the grey work as a problem you cannot solve on your own, you open the door for others to solve that problem for you.  You begin to abdicate the work, and that’s when trouble can enter.

The sliding scale of Pinocchio’s is one of the most familiar yet goofy outcomes.

Put more clearly, when you accept the terminology “disinformation”, you accept a problem.

The problem is then the tool by which authorities will step in to make judgements.

Speech, in its most consequential form, is then qualified by others to whom you have sub-contracted your thinking.

When you willingly sub-contract information filters to others, you have lost connection with the raw information.

CTH was founded upon the belief that truth has no agenda, nor does it care about you, your feelings, or your opinion of it.  It just sits there, empirically existing as evidence of information in its most pure form.

The search for truth, in all things, is the mission objective of this assembly.   Often, we don’t like the truth; often, the truth is bitter, cold, challenging and even painful to accept.  However, the truth doesn’t care.  Information in its most raw form is ambivalent to your opinion.  If you struggle to accept these things, that’s when you need grey.  The New York Times is not called the “grey lady” accidentally.

Personally, I am an absorber of information – perhaps on a scale that is unusual.  But I do not discount information from any form until I can put context to it and see if the information makes sense given all the variables present.  When something doesn’t feel right, it’s almost always because it isn’t right.

Often, I find myself struggling in the grey and complex.  It is not unusual to spend days, perhaps weeks, researching, digging, clarifying a situation, only to discover the path to finding the truth is in another direction entirely.   Erasing everything and starting over is frustrating, but it is genuinely the only approach that works; and often finding truth is supposed to be difficult, that’s why it is rewarding.

In the digital information age, we are bombarded with information.  It is easy to be overwhelmed and need to find something or someone who has better skills at separating the black grains from the white ones.  All opinions in this quest should be considered; thus, it is important to allow the free flow of information.

I am not necessarily a speech absolutist.  There is some language, particularly foul language, that needs to be constrained if we are to participate in a respectful society, with grandma’s rules and knowing the audience.  Articulation of arguments needs to be effective, respectful and forthright.

CTH has guidelines for comments for this exact reason.  It’s not about what is said, most often it is about how the opinion is said, vulgarity is not appropriate.  Those constraints need to be based on a set of inherent values.   However, when it comes to information it is important to draw a distinction from speech.

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.   We are in this situation right now.

Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook book to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove a certain speaker from the discussion.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

COVID-19 and the subsequent government lies, have helped many people to see just how dangerous the modern political Marxists are. Those who proposed a “global information governance board,” are now on their heels and increasingly desperate.  Hence, “governing is now hard” according to John Kerry.

The flickering flame of liberty and freedom has been under assault for decades, we are at an inflection point.  I remain optimistic in our ability to defeat those who are trying desperately to use all the mechanics of every system to retain power, for the same reason that all abusive relationships eventually have to end.

WOLVERINES!

.

Do not get alarmed, get informed.

RESOURCES:

Using AI for Content Moderation

Facebook / META / Tech joining with DHS

Zoom will allow Content Scraping by AI 

AI going into The Cloud

U.S. Govt Going into The Cloud With AI

Pentagon activates 175 Million IP’s **ahem**

Big Names to Attend Political AI Forum

DoD to use AI to monitor U.S. Internet for Disinformation

DHS Announces Guidelines for Using AI to monitor Americans.

DHS Announces “Expert Group”

Destroying Farmland to Reduce Population


Posted originally on Dec 19, 2023 By Martin Armstrong 

Maltus 1803
Wind Mill Destroy Farmland

Everywhere you look, there is this scheme to reduce farming, which will reduce population. That was the whole theory of Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) that the population would surpass the ability to grow food. That is the agenda. Wind generators or solar panels consume one-third of the farmland worldwide. This is what has inspired this thinking that we MUST reduce the population. War is a great tool for that, which is one reason they are pushing World War.

They insist that industrial agriculture, which is employed by the majority of the developed world, is creating climate change. The U.S. food system contributes nearly 20% of the nation’s carbon dioxide emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that agricultural land use contributes 12% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Then, they add the embodied energy required for industrial agriculture, and they claim this gets worse. The manufacture and use of pesticides and fertilizers, fuel and oil for tractors, equipment, trucking, and shipping, electricity for lighting, cooling, and heating, and emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and every possible greenhouse gas they can think of, increases the impact up to between 25% to 30% which is the number used by John Kerry.

In other words, they want to reduce agriculture, shipping, refrigeration, air conditions, and turn off heat in the winter, and reduce the population by 30-40%, and maybe they would be satisfied. They get to impose their tyrannical policies with absolutely ZERO evidence to support their theory because they ignore that natural cycles have existed for millions of years. Climate has always changed. The temperatures have NOT exceeded historical norms. The data from NYC shows that we have NOT exceeded the highs of  1932 and the days of the Dust Bowl. The mainstream media only repeats what they are told and NEVER does any mainstream media dare to investigate anything.

Climate January 1869 2021
Civilization Empires Rise Fall Armstrong

Categories:AGRICULTURECLIMATE