Het einde van gedeelde waarheid? Marlies Dekkers in gesprek met Maarten Keulemans. 📺youtu.be/OPhJP7Nrh34

'De rafels van Rusland - Waarom Moskou zijn rand niet loslaat'. “Ik was vandaag op een VIRA-vergadering. VIRA, de Vereniging voor Internationale Relaties, brengt mensen samen geïnteresseerd in internationale issues. Vele (ere)-ambassadeurs, Minister van Staat, hoge ambtenaren en kaderleden uit de privé zijn present. Een uitgelezen gezelschap. Wegens mijn vroegere job bij Buitenlandse Zaken ben ik er ook. Interessant. Vandaag kwam voormalig VRT-journalist Dirk Tieleman spreken over zijn boek 'De rafels van Rusland - Waarom Moskou zijn rand niet loslaat'. Dirk sprak een uur lang, degelijk, gedocumenteerd, met belanrijke details over Oekraïne: waarom is die inval in Oekraïne gebeurd? En zo kwamen de NAVO-uitbreiding naar Oost-Europa, Poetin op de Munchen veiligheidsconferenties van 2007, Verhofstadt op de Maidan-opstand van 2014, enz, enz, aan bod. Alles degelijk gedocumenteerd en beargumenteerd. Muisstil had de VIRA-vergadering gepassioneerd geluisterd en nieuwe nieuwe dingen gehoord. Men leerde bij over de echte oorzaken van de lopende oorlog, los van het lopende oorlogskrakeel. En dat was de vraag die ik Dirk stelde "hoe kan het dat hier, in het Brussel van de NAVO/SHAPE, de EU, Swift, Euroclear, de hoofdkantoren van multinationals, ... zo´n degelijke uiteenzetting gegeven wordt over de oorzaken van de oorlog en dat anderzijds, de media en de politiek zich beperken tot opervlakkig oorlogsgeblaat en angstaanjagend geschreeuw op zoek naar meer oorlogskredieten"? Dirk antwoordde: "omdat his masters voice bestaat; op de VRT en de andere media kent men de inhoud van mijn conferentie en, heel zwijgzaam, laat men mij weten dat dát niet kan. Mijn verhaal zal niet in de brede media, ook niet in de geschreven media, komen. De auto-censuur leert journalisten dat dát verhaal vandaag niet kan, niet mag." Velen in de zaal keken verstomd naar Dirk en sommigen kwamen mij feliciteren voor mijn vraag en klopten mij op de schouders. Uit Dirk's antwoord begreep ik dat hic et nunc het metaverhaal van het oorlogsgeroffel domineert en dus de grondige analyse over oorzaken en verantwoordelijkheden geen plaats krijgt. Onze politici en media gaan voor de vele miljarden, de 'evidente' oorlogskredieten die 'moeilijk, moeilijk, maar toch uiteraard', onze sociale zekerheid zal ophoesten. Ten minste dat hopen zij, maar we zullen zien. 31 maart komt en daarna nog.” — Lou Callewaert Pure voortschrijdende gedoogde gecamoufleerde MISDAAD is het.

We slide back into mass formation. Right now, we are still talking about the mild precursor of it ('massification' in Ellul's terms). But we are not far from a fully developed mass formation in which the belief or non-belief in the war narrative tears apart all social groups – including groups of friends and families – and a radical intolerance emerges towards anyone who refuses to go along with a black-and-white hate story about the Great Enemy. And this mass formation will unleash even more aggression than the previous one (because the previous mass formation already exacerbated loneliness, the lack of meaning, and the fear and frustration that existed). The Russians are also people. And unless you really want to ignore the lead-up to this conflict, you cannot possibly place the blame entirely on them. Start by looking up the Lord Palmerston strategy, which already led to the Crimean War in the 19th century. Then come back and tell me that NATO has not made any offensive acts towards Russia, actions that shed a clearer light on what is happening now and debunk the myth of the eternally peaceful NATO.

Dit. Echt gvd dit. Lees dat artikel van @Anton_Th.

Na lange tijd nog eens een bericht gepost op wordpress: LUMBAGO pauldhaeneblog.wordpress.com…

"Zelfs als de overheid burgers niet gevangenzet voor het uitspreken van een mening, kan de overheid zorgen dat wij niet worden blootgesteld aan nieuwe ideeën en zo prima de vrije meningsvorming beperken." Over het gevaar van optreden tegen 'desinformatie': jonawalk.com/blog/hoe-vrij-i…

In an article in Danish @Zetland I explain how it could save millions of lives if the US gets a vaccine skeptical health secretary - because he might be able to increase awareness of the effects of vaccines on OVERALL health. This could be the key to focusing on the NON-SPECIFC EFFECTS OF VACCINES #NSEvac on the broader immune system and on other diseases. The phenomenon of #NSEvac is now recognized by the vast majority of scientists, it is on Nature's list of great discoveries, and it has an entire chapter in the world's most important textbook on vaccines. However, the health authorities have not yet embraced #NSEvac, and thus a great potential for improving overall health with wiser use of vaccines is not being harvested. zetland.dk/historie/s3k4aeWA…

VRT news, superverspreider van desinformatie: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: van advocaat milieurecht tot superverspreider van desinformatie vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2024/11/15/…

Juist

Against censorship and silencing of scientists - for science and for public trust. The Scientific Establishment Is Turning 'Science' Into a Dogmatic Tool of Oppression | Opinion - Newsweek newsweek.com/scientific-esta…

I just talked to Heiko. Within 40 minutes of his 2nd Pfizer shots he couldn't breathe. He's seen over 50 doctors, but only 4 said it was the Pfizer shot. The other 46 doctors told him it's a coincidence: "we don't know what this is or what causes it." Horrible.

A must watch

There’s been speculation about why Pavel Durov visited France, particularly given that an arrest order had been issued against him there. Rumors now suggest that President Emmanuel Macron might have invited Durov to have dinner with him to lure him into a trap. At least, Le Canard Enchainé (France's most prestigious investigation newspaper) reports that this is what Durov said upon being arrested. If these rumors are true, it would represent a significant diplomatic and political development. More than that, it would raise serious questions about the ethical qualities of one of the world’s most prominent political leaders. On this occasion, it’s worth recalling a previous instance where President Macron’s ethical positioning raised concerns—his approach to handling non-vaccinated people. As we all know, the anticipated "pandemic of the unvaccinated" didn’t materialize, and the vaccines didn’t prevent the spread of the virus. In other words, Macron not only made a severe ethical transgression but also relied on disinformation. One might wonder: doesn’t the beautiful country of France deserve better than this? Here’s what President Macron said about the unvaccinated: "That's the strategy. What you just said is the best argument. In a democracy, the worst enemy is lies and stupidity. We are putting pressure on the unvaccinated by limiting their access to social activities as much as possible. By the way, almost everyone, more than 90%, has adhered to this. It's a very small minority that is resistant. How do we reduce that? We reduce it, pardon me for saying it like this, by annoying them even more. I'm not in favor of annoying the French. I complain all day long about the administration when it blocks them. Well, in this case, I really want to annoy the unvaccinated. And so, we're going to keep doing it until the end. That's the strategy. I'm not going to put them in prison, I'm not going to force them to get vaccinated. So, we have to tell them: from January 15th, you won't be able to go to restaurants, you won't be able to have a drink, you won't be able to go to a café, you won't be able to go to the theater, you won't be able to go to the cinema… (…) The immense moral fault of the anti-vaxxers: they undermine what is the strength of a nation. When my freedom threatens that of others, I become irresponsible. An irresponsible person is no longer a citizen."

Let's use our good American heads. 🇺🇸

Dear friends, I am busy writing my next book and I like it. A short contemplation today. You know it already: After Google/YouTube will have to testify under oath in court for suppressing content regarding the attack on Trump (and other undemocratic election manipulation), Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook (and more broadly, Meta) also came forward yesterday. He was pressured by the Biden administration to censor critical voices during the COVID-19 crisis, and he suppressed critical/negative information about Biden, particularly regarding the story of Hunter Biden's laptop. He says he's sorry and that he won't do it again. I hope everyone realizes what this implies. A spicy detail: Zuckerberg points to his fact-checkers, claiming they misjudged the situation, and he was guided by them. Fact-checkers and Digital First Responders—the Ministry of Truth from Orwell. We already knew that. Does Zuckerberg really just know this now? Why is Zuckerberg coming out with all this now? Humans are complex beings and rarely know themselves why they do what they do, but in this case, the motives might be more straightforward. Now that Tulsi Gabbard is joining the Trump camp, following in the footsteps of RFK Jr., Zuckerberg might be sensing the storm coming: a future Trump administration might launch an investigation into the massive manipulation and censorship that occurred both during election times and the virus panic. So Zuckerberg is throwing the Biden administration under the bus. This is always the weak point of totalitarian structures: the psychological mechanisms like mass formation lead to such a deep impoverishment of human bonds, even among the totalitarian comrades, that they can't trust each other and mercilessly throw each other under the bus when the opportunity arises. Of course, this doesn't only apply to the Democrats in America or the dominant narrative. We are all children of this atomized era, and in a way, it's not easy for any group or movement to keep the human connection truly human. And the big question will be: in which direction will Trump, as a person, evolve under the influence of the enormous psychological forces acting upon him? Will he become more human and seize the opportunity he might get to truly create a more humane America, together with a few Democrats like Kennedy and Gabbard? Or will he slide into resentment and become more and more the monster he should be fighting? Trump and Kennedy are finding each other now, something they never expected. But whether that also means they'll continue to align if they actually have to work together is another question. There are quite a few issues on which Trump and Kennedy hold radically different positions, I believe. The biggest challenge won't be winning the election; the biggest challenge will be governing in a truly humane way in times of the dehumanization and desouling of the social fabric. One thing is certain: the coming months in the USA will be anything but boring. Mattias

Knap werk…gelukkig blijft Pepijn waakzaam

Dat noem ik nu eens gedegen en goed onderbouwde kritiek. Proficiat

We once believed our leaders served the people's best interests, but in 2020, that belief was shattered. One man, convinced that he alone was the voice of science, wielded immense power, making decisions that directly impacted 330 million lives. To reclaim the ideals we lost during the pandemic, we must embrace open dialogue and the scientific process, including rigorous analysis, debate, and transparency, rather than accepting government and corporate-led censorship.

Rake column van Leon de Winter waar geen speld tussen te krijgen is. "Die Duitse documenten zijn onweerlegbaar: de bevolking werd gemanipuleerd. Er heerste bij de politieke elites een grote behoefte aan het verguizen van weerbarstige burgers die zo brutaal waren er een eigen mening op na te houden. Op basis van zwakke argumenten werd de samenleving angst aangepraat. In Nederland hebben we nog geen klokkenluider van dit formaat mogen begroeten, maar we kunnen hetzelfde verwachten: zelfoverschatting en machtswellust hebben zonder twijfel ook bij onze overheden en media de ambities gevoed." ➡️archive.md/2024.08.13-180703…