Chritine i just read your comment on eric coppolinos substack ------ about,,, in your words (((((( THIS NOTION )))))))) how we no virus people or to just go along with the yes virus people -------- i agree completely with everyword you say in the comment to the point where i think maybe you should repost it on this site because i am sure your loyal readers would love reading it as much as i did ------------
Bob-enough, thanks for the video. I basically know and agree with every point it makes, except one. I doubt Rockefeller cared about the fact that pharmaceutical drugs were (back then) oil based. I am sure that did not motivate him. The quantity of oil needed for pills was and is insignificant and he was then the wealthiest American. He had nothing marginally significant to gain in terms of income. I believe he was indoctrinated and a True Believer, since he consulted only with "leading science experts" who endlessly promoted bad ideas.
The AMA was the Big Push in lobbying state legislatures for licensing restrictions for physcians, for officially accredited and restricted medical schools, and to impose strict adherence to allopathic ideas. But I know from prior research for an article I wrote about this years ago, that the AMA did not have to be taken over by Rockefeller for the purpose of regimenting medicine. It was populated with allopath doctors who complained endlessly and on record at their AMA meetings that they could not make a living, there was too much competition and that people were being hoodwinked by alternative medical approaches to healing and illness.
The political cause that favored state restrictions and subsidies in medicine wanted the same for every business sector of every description, not only medicine. That cause was the Progressive Movement, which was inspired by European socialists and fascists--a cause that captured the minds and hearts of a majority of Americans, at least to some extent. Rockefeller was, as I noted before, a business genius and completely self made. But he was not a thinker and so was easily pulled into the orbit of the (now many times falsified) hypothesis of germs causing disease. Being enormously ambitious, he set up foundational support and advocacy of germ ideas, bludgeoned alternatives he naively believed were wrong and dangerous, bought (or rewarded) institutions and key people, nearly all of whom believed fervently in the great new fashionable discovery of germs and viruses. He saw to the appointment and promotion of key people in the AMA, in all important universities and in government-state and federal-to advance this"great and noble cause".
Rockefeller did not have to be a macabre character to become a malignant influence. He was human, with a typically human range of values, not some two dimmensional character from a bad movie. In fact, making money in a voluntary order, which is what he did very ssuccessfully, is an admirabale achievement, not the mark of a bad man.
To cause trouble when it came to constricting freedom and restricting scientific inquiry, he only needed to behave carelessly when it came to figuring out what is true and/or false concerning ideas (in this case politics-ethics and science). Ironically, the same Progressive Movement that swept up Rockefeller (and most important and influential people then and today), the movement that inspired his advocacy of state control of medical science and the commerce of medical services, and his capture of state controlled universities nearly everywhere--that same philosophical movement caused the coerced breakup of Standard Oil Company that he had built up brilliantly from scratch.
Folks who disparage Rockefeller as ruthless and greedy are themselves offspring of the Progressive Movement, which has always been hostile to capitalism and truly free enterprise. That Rockefeller supported Progressives in their march to regiment science and medicine, even as that cause led to breaking apart his company, illlustrates the ranks of non-thinkers includes many people from all walks of life.
Interesting comment, but I disagree totally on a couple of points.
1. Rockefeller did not want new markets for is PETROLEUM REFINED PRODUCTS... erryes he did and now there are over 6,000 products PLUS thatare stated using petroleum refined products.
To quote ="In refineries, different parts of crude oil are separated and other usable products are produced. According to the report of the international oil and gas magazine, there are more than 6,000 oil products, most of which are used in our daily lives, and perhaps few people have information about their relationship with oil."....
Controllers always frame their activities as "great and noble" and consult with so-called "leading science experts". It's hardly proof of sincerity.
The presence of other self-serving control freaks in the AMA doesn't negate Rockefeller's role.
Bludgeoning other people's approaches to health is a selfish, ruthless thing to do.
From your own account, he was anti-freedom.
If an anti-freedom, allegedly non-thinking, ruthless businessman who restricted scientific inquiry is your idea of brilliance/genius/admirable and not a bad man... okie dokie. But you don't get to speak for everyone who sees things differently and framing us as "hostile" and anti-true-freedom is ridiculous. What a spin.
I merely pointed out that accusing Rockefeller of "ruthless" and "greedy" behavior is smear-talk that originally was promoted by crusaders and politicians of the Progressive Movement.
From Bing's search engine results for (mischaracterized) "Robber Barons": The term "robber baron" began to be used in the early 1870s to describe a class of extremely wealthy businessmen who used ruthless and unethical business tactics to dominate vital industries. In an era with virtually no regulation of business, industries such as railroads, steel, and petroleum became monopolies.
People who do not understand sound economic philosophy, (for whatever their reasons) sometimes repeat this thematic viciousness (sorry, that's what it is) as though it were self evidently true. But it is easy to prove it is not true. Many believe that "monopolies" were/are bad, yet they can't define the idea nor explain how a predatory monopoly could arise in a free market in which people retain their right to say "no thanks". The idea of market monopoly (thanks to Progressive Joan Robinson and many other economists influenced by European economic fascists and socialists) was derived from misconceived analysis concerning so-called "market structure", which is derived from false ideas about the nature of competition, which is spun out from price theory misconceptions, which are produced from false methodology in economic reasoning. (These misconceptions and methodological confusion are deeply entrenched today, like the misconceptions we all understand regarding facts and method in the refuted germ hypothesis.)
Of course, it is hardly controversial even today to declare the obvious, which is Progressives are opposed to economic freedom (capitalism), long to control every aspecct of the lives of other people (the public health regime and its regimentation, for example), and deny and abhor individual rights. I refer here to progressive idealists; I did not point at anyone on this thread, except by referenece to particular comments.
All the unproven smears against Rockefeller's business success--that's what people most resent about the man--are based on logical fallacies (and lies too) propagandized by government schools starting in the late 19th century. In what ways, exactly, was Rockefeller supposedly "ruthless" in his business practices? He was a brilliant self made businessman who could identify and effectively capitalize on opportunities nearly everyone else failed to see or act on, which made him successful; he plowed the profits from his successes back into his business, which grew in scale, efficiency, and innovative breakthroughs, so much so that he thereby made life far easier for Americans. He produced massive quantities of inexpensive kerosene which everyone prefered to costly and scarce whale oil for lighting and heating houses. He produced inexpensive diesel and gasoline to replace coal and horse power, and so on. Yet he is condemned as a "ruthless and greedy" businessman deserving of condemnatiion, because he made himself wealthy doing this.. That is unjust.
Why is it that the age of so-called "robber barons", such as Rockefeller, Carnegie and James Hill, was the time of the greatest improvement in productivity and therefore the fastest improvement in the lives of ordinary people in history? It is because these successful and brilliant businessmen--all self-made from humble beginnings--introduced great leaps foward in innovation, capital accumulation and productivity that made kerosene, diesel and gasoline cheap and affordable, slashed transportation costs across vast stretches of uninhabited desert and mountains, and provided abundant supplies of excellent steel with which to build an industrial civilization. This industrial explosion lengthened lifespans, made lives more pleasant, prosperous and rewarding, and banished starvation from American experience in contrast to most of the rest of the world. This was a productive benevolent NATURAL order, for freedom is natural; yet Progressive idealaists hate, smear and want to destroy the voluntary order. This is why they defame the most successful producers and innovators of a system they hope will fail.
When I encounter claims that the "ruthless" or "greedy" Rockefeller wanted to capture medicine to sell more oil, I defend Rockefeller (and would any other defamed capitalist achiever) for the sake of upholding what I know is just and right. If those claims had not been written here, I would not have responded here.
That Rockefeller was a Progressive in his ethical-political beliefs is pretty obvious, and unless one were an active and questioning thinker, one would most likely get carried along with such a cultural current. Should one think and question (at least quietly, in one's mind)? Yes. Did Rockefeller do this when it came to ideas concerning politics-ethics and medical science? No. Was he wrong not to have questioned and thought carefully? Yes. Is this important? Yes.
Was Rockefeller wrong to lobby politicians, fund a big campaign to regiment thinking in medical science and crusade to impose medical professional licensing and accredidation requirements for medical schools (policed by the AMA)? Yes. Was he wrong to massively fund state-run universities that don't pay their own way, as does any business or individual but depend on endless tax dollar funding (and foundation grants)? Yes, because such universities destory academic freedom in obedience to political elites and big contributors such as Rockefeller. They then install and promote, to the exclusion of more rational intellectuals, pseudo-intellectuals who promote irrationalism in science, economic philosophy, history, physics and philosophy itself. No wonder we're in the mess we struggle with today.
Rockefeller deserves his share of blame, but he was hardly alone and certainly not the Prime Mover of a vast cultural and philosophical change.
All freedoms, properly defined, are interdependent. Take away property rights in the name of punishing successful large businesses and one thereby interfers with freedom of speech, since any platform is a form of property. Regulate social behavior in the name of "equality" and one thereby deprives people of the right of freedom of association. Turn over education to the state and one loses the opportunity to learn of competing out-of-favor ideas, because dissenters are shunned and banned from the state-controlled institutions of "learning" (propaganda).
Was Rockefeller sincere? I assume he was and have seen no evidence to the contrary. All sorts of people sincerely "believe" all sorts of nonsense all the time. Why would he be different? Was he responsible for the support of government regulation by "political doctors" of the AMA? I know of no evidence this is true, but no doubt he deployed money in pusuit of this false ideal. The pro-regulatory movement seen in medicine and science was running amouck everywhere. Economic freedom (and actually reason) were under attack by progressives on all fronts: education, "trust busting", railroad fares, labor wages, special legal privileges granted to labot unions, zoning ordiances and on and on. All this fervor for state control came about at once, in a well spring of European ideals. The regulation and ruination of medical thinking and practice was hardly unique. Roosevelt swam with the tide; he did not cause it.
My defense of Rockefeller relates to his business genius and success, which was a great achievement of rationality, productivity, intelligence, self reliance, good and hard work, and so on. His genuis, and that of other business geniuses, brought about enormous material improvements for many millions of people.
My criticism of Rockefeller relates to his stupid and destructive political lobbying against individual intellectual soverignty (by forcing his favored curriculum on aspiring doctors lest they be "misled"). Did he know anything about the proper epistemology of scientific reasoning? Obviously not. Did he actually understand the Big New Ideas he set out to promote and impose? I doubt it. Rockefeller's neglect of his responsibility to think critically about the (unsound) reasoning supporting this trendy nonsense contributed, to some degree, to the human causualties of the failed hypothesis of germ theory.
My previous reference to "a great and noble cause" was my attempt to see things as he may have, not because it was really great and noble. Misguided ideologues always believe (or tell themselves they believe) in virtue.
Whenever, in my 3 posts on this subject, I criticized "progressives", I had in mind the ideology and historical movement, not any particular person on this thread. I did criticize certain accusations made against Rockefeller, in a way I hoped would explain why those were misleading and wrong, which tied in to the Progressive Movement. Thanks. Done now.
"People who do not understand sound economic philosophy, (for whatever their reasons) sometimes repeat this thematic viciousness"
"yet they can't define the idea nor explain how a predatory monopoly could arise in a free market in which people retain their right to say "no thanks"
People have been intentionally duped into wanting modern "healthcare". And the right to say "no thanks" is not nearly as simple as you suggest. My mother is afraid not to follow her MD's advice lest she be cut off from having a doctor at all. Many are in the same boat. And many, as I'm sure you realize, have been coerced into jabs and this didn't just begin with fake-covid!
I don't have time to read the rest of your extremely long comment and not interested in economics.
I decided to mail my deceased wife's Rabbi your Post. She died as a result of Covid insanity in June 2023. I emailed him information the start of the Pandemic. He followed orders from who knows and said he was injecting. Maybe he can't connect dots. I have noticed a reduction in attendance when I do attend services. People I have known over 26 years who always attend on a given Friday night I do not see when I go.
Zurawell is a new name to me, I'll look up the interview w Bailey. Interesting topic to me. I'm grateful RFK is exiting the biggest stage if that's how he feels about so many tens of thousands of Palestinian kids and their families. The Western massacre. And after all he knows, he still claims viruses exist. I'm left guessing! I can't research my way out of it and that's why such ppl are so monstrous. It's the kind of dead end provided by Critical Theory; complete nonsense yet the believers presume to take the high road. Freedom movement's tainted all over with the big & otherwise names claiming "virus". Every time we take the sign down they put another one back up! Latest one catches my eye is George Webb. Same pattern. His motto is follow the metadata yet says virus so proudly makes me wonder if he's paid a quota. Such ppl Not being compromised doesn't seem possible to me. What IS possible is influencers doing *whatever* 95% of the time, but very well paid to keep the word/concept alive where it's existence is most called into question. Plenty of controlled ops would gladly sleep in rental cars for a crazy salary under the table. ""I'm a citizen journalist on a shoestring budget"" mm hmm. Or there's Tucker born into stupid stupid $ that's the presumed hero of the freedom types having taken hundreds of millions from blackrock/msm and now from WEF/X with that painted-on confounded look. Every few months I see Mike Adams and Alex J are saying "Hey trump this is it! No more trumpy trump messaging from us if you keep pushing the jibby jabs. We mean it again". It never ends. I like you Christine Massey and that hasn't changed so thank you.
I hear you, it's frustrating for sure. Thank god the pseudoscience is being revealed without their help.. and well Mike Adams actually recently made clear "no viruses at all" statements with Alec Zeck and Mike Winner, which was wonderful.
Jesse is a great guy. He used to be with TNT Radio and is now doing his own thing and is firmly grounded in reality re "viruses"... even named his platform "The Methods Section". He's interviewed numerous no-virus people, some of us more than once.
Certainly I remember Adams doing a pretty long segment on no-viruses around July 6 '22 soon after an interview with someone, maybe you or he did one with Cowan and Kaufman together.
I did one with him, and he did one with both Tom and Andy, but very recently he was with Alec Zeck and seems to fully get it now. Nice that he could admit he was initially wrong.
Feb 24·edited Feb 24Liked by Christine Massey FOIs
Good rant! To be fair, I wonder if sometimes people try to be "nice." I'm kinda over that, but not over being CIVIL. ;) I DO think that it's likely things are getting a bit wilder and wilder as the awareness of "Covid" being a falsity grows... The Nasties get itchy when they think about Mussolini... Let 'em itch, sez the bitch. Woof. I chew they bootox arf.
The thing was launched in December 2019. We now have February 2024. A long stretch of the promised two weeks to flatten the curve.
The whole world was stopped by a handful of organizations in all its interactions and transactions, from family relationships to international trade. If we checked it diligently (FOIA?), we would probably learn that the whole Solar System was stopped in 2020 and reset, in a complimentary move to that single decision which made the geocentric concept illegal and punishable and replaced by the new heliocentric theory which glorified a yesterday’s bad actor - was it the original great reset?
With the unprecedented consolidation of the humanity into “One Earth One Suffering” coalition, we entered a new era of the scientific development in which reason is no longer necessary, evidence is no longer considered of any use, procedures turned into rituals. It all looks like another part of “The Thing” story: there is something there, it is invisible, but it is bad. After four years, the story changed: FOIA documents show that the only thing that exists is the scenario, but it is great in redeveloping the landscape of the whole world.
Consequently, since the science does not need any evidence any more, the social contract under which people interact with organizations has been unilaterally terminated. No documents are needed for it because there can be none when the inquired institutions reply that they don’t have any. Is it the origin of the new brave world? Are you feeling to be a free person, no longer entangled with institutions, red tape and administrative battles that eat up human energy in exchange for nothing? Is it the promised great reset, the one which sounded ominous and turns out to be a liberating glorious move?
This "new social contract" could easyly be used against the state. If institutions in science, media, gov neither need facts nor documentation anymore, why should the people, who are collectively 'the state', need them?
If science can't give facts upon which authorities rule out decisions, why should the individual be compelled to show proof, for example medical excemptions, to escape the authorities' rules?
Because the society system in which we live is actually monarchy, although renamed for convenience as capitalism, democracy or socialism. All countries of the world are monarchies because the use of violence (physical force) is legally reserved only to the state. The people have no legal right to defend themselves or even passively resist - compliance is the only behavior the state accepts.
We live in an ocean of fiction, but we do not want to see it for what it is. We choose this or that person or party to support in an illusion that by advocating for them they will protect us in return. They won’t. No matter whom you support, they will demand your money and servitude the same. We are slaves to the state, and this is our reality. Fancy words don’t change it.
Is it good or bad? Neither. It is what it is. You always have a choice to go with it and be a good citizen or to oppose it and become a criminal, with all consequences of either of these decisions. The so called social contract is merely an illusion that the state owns you something in return for your own illusions (taxation, “free” benefits, education, pension, safety, etc.). Wars (initiated without asking for your opinion and demanding certain concessions on your part without compensation or even a right to challenge) prove that social contract does not exist. But we feel better dreaming about it.
A lot of things is beyond us. We don’t really know anything about the last four years because no-one of those active players has said anything. All these fantasies who manages which puppets, why and what for are funny and absurd. We only see the actions and the outcomes.
In other words, we don’t know what is happening, why and for what purpose. A climate which would make any normal person go insane within a few days. We read from reports that this process is happening, with suicide rates skyrocketing, child isolation exceeding all fears, and adult persons losing grip of the closest reality. Long term, it may turn out to be the most destructive living environment we have been in. Even a war may appeal better because the enemy is defined, the objective is defined, the measures are know, and the end result is known or expected. Is it why we are so easy to manipulate to see the enemy behind the borderline and neglect them when they are close?
With so many factors out of our hands, finding areas to work with on a personal level may be an only way to retain sanity and become stronger, despite the circumstances. Everything is double-edged, all things have two faces, or more. I see a lot of writers and podcast makers, they have become so strongly magnetized to the negative.
They won’t let go. Even if you point out their wrong logic, they are stuck in their fear mode. Even when you indicate wrong words they use, they can’t leave their fear-dominated new earning job which consists in planting the doomsday all around. They are already dead, both mentally and spiritually, they just don’t know it yet.
This is where a place for personal transformation comes in. Your single-focus effort is a great example of it. I bet there are times when you are laughing out loud seeing all these letters from self-respecting pseudo-scientists ornamented with plenty of letters. In a strange way, this is a huge comedy performance - the whole world believes in something which the main players say does not exist. Wow.
I agree with a lot of what you said in both your comments. We are living in the "me, me, me, participation trophy" world. Now everyone is herded into their own little words (phones) It really is a form of insanity. I'm thankful for my sense of humor and my humble spirit, it helps watching the show.
Viewed from the sidewalk, we are losing (we have already lost?) the game of life. Historically, adults brought up children in a way similar to their own styles, in the silent anticipation of their children growing into responsible persons who can and are willing to both manage their own life and supervise their elderly parents and neighbors. Sort of a generational relay race: we are giving you about 40-60 years of our combined lives (father + mother) so that you could do the same when your time is due.
This model functioned perfectly and ensured smooth transition from generation to generation, with tolerance for occasional outcasts who choose or have to (for organic reasons) live at the expense of others and give nothing in return.
There was a safeguard preventing the destruction of this model, which was the presumed educational cycle based on training, apprenticeship and gradual acquisition of professional knowledge. Old school, from cleaning the floor to managing the business, will all interim steps learned first-hand.
This model was deliberately destroyed with the introduction of the so called social media and opening the publishing cycle (initially through YT) to amateurs sharing the secrets of various trades - in detail and for free. The sharing virus spread like wildfire and is now covering literally every aspect of business, professional or technical fields, including car repairs, surgery or high-end business management. Teachers, tutors, guides, mentors, all are now outdated: they are all inefficient, and their teaching styles are pure waste of time and energy for the student. With this disruption, respect for the elderly or professionals who have real-life expertise has disappeared.
Younger generations happily isolate themselves from the older ones because they truly cannot benefit from these relations. Older generations tend to live in the past, which in itself is a bad approach, but in the face of the disconnect it becomes a depression factor which is insurmountable.
Life-cycle-wide, we are dying out. The only way out is to create small communities, literally cults and sects, which share objectives and rituals and provide support and strength to each other. But this life style is openly attacked from all sides, including professional environments. We appear to be doomed to become an Earth of isolated individuals. Creating meaningful family relationships under such conditions is out of question. We are on the final straight, although we deny it fiercely.
From this vantage point, watching the show is equivalent to a silent suicide. Without higher awareness and understanding of these processes, the whole thing is no fun.
I feel ya, brotha. Especially about the teachers and elders thing. I've had so many good teachers in my time here. Including 2 parents who did the best they could, far from perfect but now that I'm a man, I'm sooo thankful for them. You got me looking back at my life, it's full of great teachers/elders/mentors, I truly wasted a lot of my life with a very bad path which most recently I've changed. I was led astray by my emotions and this society told me I was right. I was wrong. So wrong. I should be dead. So now, I'm a different man. I've always been this guy at my core, he's always been there, I let the darkness guide me for most of my adult life, not anymore. Game recognize game. Evil recognize evil. Fear has been let loose unto all of us. Many are far from able to handle it and many don't know and will never know any different. They are pretty much evil incarnation. I hope you don't stay bummed out, my friend. If you do, they're winning. I hope there is light in your life
Great words, Mike. Finding this inner strength is not always easy, but keeping it on the top of adverse circumstances, that’s a high art. What you call “evil incarnation”, I see as not human any more. Sort of, everyone being born with the capacity to bring out this light spark during the lifetime, but not all meet this destination and some slowly deny it. I don’t see it as bad or wrong, this is the life we have. Maybe it has been designed in this way so that we could overcome this and rise to be the light. Take care.
Even rocks change. They WILL let go, eventually. They'll have to. There is no entropy in this, at least, not for long! And I do understand the sort of despair you're describing, but I tell you this... That, too, is transitory. Hang in there, and think POSITIVE... because it matters.
Let's get Amit some likes on his great efforts: https://amitsade.substack.com/
Addendum, March 19, 2024: Amit has sent me pdfs of his requests and the responses, which I've now added to the article.
Keep going, Christine. Screw the trolls and operatives.
Thank you for your good work and the valuable informaation sources you provide. It is all useful and rewarding.
Thank you Rider. Cheers.
Chritine i just read your comment on eric coppolinos substack ------ about,,, in your words (((((( THIS NOTION )))))))) how we no virus people or to just go along with the yes virus people -------- i agree completely with everyword you say in the comment to the point where i think maybe you should repost it on this site because i am sure your loyal readers would love reading it as much as i did ------------
Thanks Bradley, I might do that :)
TI HO MENZIONATA PER FORNIRE A UNA ASSOCIAZIONE ITALIANA "RI-ESISTENZA " LA TESTIMONIANZA DEI TUOI CONTINUI " FOI "
SPERANDO DI FARE BENE
SEMPRE TANTISSIMA STIMA
Ermanno
When will people wake up and understand that NO VIRUS, NOT ONE, EVER....
1. Has ever been isolated
2. Ever been proved to be transmittable.
??????????????????????????????????????
Once you understand that, you will understand the fraud of so called vaccines.
....
2 minute video; please watch it... and sorry if I have bombarded it on you before:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsqhwXfn2IU
WAKE UP PEOPLE; all smoke and mirrors - the World is a stage.
Bob-enough, thanks for the video. I basically know and agree with every point it makes, except one. I doubt Rockefeller cared about the fact that pharmaceutical drugs were (back then) oil based. I am sure that did not motivate him. The quantity of oil needed for pills was and is insignificant and he was then the wealthiest American. He had nothing marginally significant to gain in terms of income. I believe he was indoctrinated and a True Believer, since he consulted only with "leading science experts" who endlessly promoted bad ideas.
The AMA was the Big Push in lobbying state legislatures for licensing restrictions for physcians, for officially accredited and restricted medical schools, and to impose strict adherence to allopathic ideas. But I know from prior research for an article I wrote about this years ago, that the AMA did not have to be taken over by Rockefeller for the purpose of regimenting medicine. It was populated with allopath doctors who complained endlessly and on record at their AMA meetings that they could not make a living, there was too much competition and that people were being hoodwinked by alternative medical approaches to healing and illness.
The political cause that favored state restrictions and subsidies in medicine wanted the same for every business sector of every description, not only medicine. That cause was the Progressive Movement, which was inspired by European socialists and fascists--a cause that captured the minds and hearts of a majority of Americans, at least to some extent. Rockefeller was, as I noted before, a business genius and completely self made. But he was not a thinker and so was easily pulled into the orbit of the (now many times falsified) hypothesis of germs causing disease. Being enormously ambitious, he set up foundational support and advocacy of germ ideas, bludgeoned alternatives he naively believed were wrong and dangerous, bought (or rewarded) institutions and key people, nearly all of whom believed fervently in the great new fashionable discovery of germs and viruses. He saw to the appointment and promotion of key people in the AMA, in all important universities and in government-state and federal-to advance this"great and noble cause".
Rockefeller did not have to be a macabre character to become a malignant influence. He was human, with a typically human range of values, not some two dimmensional character from a bad movie. In fact, making money in a voluntary order, which is what he did very ssuccessfully, is an admirabale achievement, not the mark of a bad man.
To cause trouble when it came to constricting freedom and restricting scientific inquiry, he only needed to behave carelessly when it came to figuring out what is true and/or false concerning ideas (in this case politics-ethics and science). Ironically, the same Progressive Movement that swept up Rockefeller (and most important and influential people then and today), the movement that inspired his advocacy of state control of medical science and the commerce of medical services, and his capture of state controlled universities nearly everywhere--that same philosophical movement caused the coerced breakup of Standard Oil Company that he had built up brilliantly from scratch.
Folks who disparage Rockefeller as ruthless and greedy are themselves offspring of the Progressive Movement, which has always been hostile to capitalism and truly free enterprise. That Rockefeller supported Progressives in their march to regiment science and medicine, even as that cause led to breaking apart his company, illlustrates the ranks of non-thinkers includes many people from all walks of life.
Interesting comment, but I disagree totally on a couple of points.
1. Rockefeller did not want new markets for is PETROLEUM REFINED PRODUCTS... erryes he did and now there are over 6,000 products PLUS thatare stated using petroleum refined products.
To quote ="In refineries, different parts of crude oil are separated and other usable products are produced. According to the report of the international oil and gas magazine, there are more than 6,000 oil products, most of which are used in our daily lives, and perhaps few people have information about their relationship with oil."....
https://www.petronaftco.com/main-petroleum-products/
Coca Cola moving from glass to plastic bottles should also be an eye opener.
...
Rockefeller was a complete, satanic POS; like Rothschild and the rest of the elitist, globalist parasitical scum.
...
Yes I know all about "Standard Oil Company" ESSO ... EXXON etc and that all plays part and parcel in his greed. Al Jazeera of all people did a brilliant documentary on it; called the Seven Sisters = https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=85af15397c77c0f6&cs=0&sxsrf=ACQVn099JlXRe6-le6q31iHJFXa6b37aRg:1709070934536&q=the+secret+of+the+seven+sisters+episodes&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi8o8SzwcyEAxUbgv0HHSfBDkkQyNoBKAB6BAgSEAA&biw=1396&bih=639&dpr=2.75&si=AKbGX_qkgT59EWLOobOMXnWSrktu6LTVCu-KzxqOJSsWAJEBdswvMiZfmCox5yGXcmTuK6mnsfw5ZMnZLkBciTJEiUaAwluTKWyoX2_ThJAwzRFj98kcjPx6uC4tFiGq_65EdI1xWtWTrcsn9rcJO7AgZlP9a0tSzMqJlR0znQCOh0nCXo0PJW8%3D&ictx=1
Extra = https://www.americanforeignrelations.com/knowledge/Oil.html
....
HE IS A EUGENISIST, A PARASITE, A GLOBAL WORM and has every finger in every UN and WEF pie to control and kill off humanity...
Controllers always frame their activities as "great and noble" and consult with so-called "leading science experts". It's hardly proof of sincerity.
The presence of other self-serving control freaks in the AMA doesn't negate Rockefeller's role.
Bludgeoning other people's approaches to health is a selfish, ruthless thing to do.
From your own account, he was anti-freedom.
If an anti-freedom, allegedly non-thinking, ruthless businessman who restricted scientific inquiry is your idea of brilliance/genius/admirable and not a bad man... okie dokie. But you don't get to speak for everyone who sees things differently and framing us as "hostile" and anti-true-freedom is ridiculous. What a spin.
I merely pointed out that accusing Rockefeller of "ruthless" and "greedy" behavior is smear-talk that originally was promoted by crusaders and politicians of the Progressive Movement.
From Bing's search engine results for (mischaracterized) "Robber Barons": The term "robber baron" began to be used in the early 1870s to describe a class of extremely wealthy businessmen who used ruthless and unethical business tactics to dominate vital industries. In an era with virtually no regulation of business, industries such as railroads, steel, and petroleum became monopolies.
People who do not understand sound economic philosophy, (for whatever their reasons) sometimes repeat this thematic viciousness (sorry, that's what it is) as though it were self evidently true. But it is easy to prove it is not true. Many believe that "monopolies" were/are bad, yet they can't define the idea nor explain how a predatory monopoly could arise in a free market in which people retain their right to say "no thanks". The idea of market monopoly (thanks to Progressive Joan Robinson and many other economists influenced by European economic fascists and socialists) was derived from misconceived analysis concerning so-called "market structure", which is derived from false ideas about the nature of competition, which is spun out from price theory misconceptions, which are produced from false methodology in economic reasoning. (These misconceptions and methodological confusion are deeply entrenched today, like the misconceptions we all understand regarding facts and method in the refuted germ hypothesis.)
Of course, it is hardly controversial even today to declare the obvious, which is Progressives are opposed to economic freedom (capitalism), long to control every aspecct of the lives of other people (the public health regime and its regimentation, for example), and deny and abhor individual rights. I refer here to progressive idealists; I did not point at anyone on this thread, except by referenece to particular comments.
All the unproven smears against Rockefeller's business success--that's what people most resent about the man--are based on logical fallacies (and lies too) propagandized by government schools starting in the late 19th century. In what ways, exactly, was Rockefeller supposedly "ruthless" in his business practices? He was a brilliant self made businessman who could identify and effectively capitalize on opportunities nearly everyone else failed to see or act on, which made him successful; he plowed the profits from his successes back into his business, which grew in scale, efficiency, and innovative breakthroughs, so much so that he thereby made life far easier for Americans. He produced massive quantities of inexpensive kerosene which everyone prefered to costly and scarce whale oil for lighting and heating houses. He produced inexpensive diesel and gasoline to replace coal and horse power, and so on. Yet he is condemned as a "ruthless and greedy" businessman deserving of condemnatiion, because he made himself wealthy doing this.. That is unjust.
Why is it that the age of so-called "robber barons", such as Rockefeller, Carnegie and James Hill, was the time of the greatest improvement in productivity and therefore the fastest improvement in the lives of ordinary people in history? It is because these successful and brilliant businessmen--all self-made from humble beginnings--introduced great leaps foward in innovation, capital accumulation and productivity that made kerosene, diesel and gasoline cheap and affordable, slashed transportation costs across vast stretches of uninhabited desert and mountains, and provided abundant supplies of excellent steel with which to build an industrial civilization. This industrial explosion lengthened lifespans, made lives more pleasant, prosperous and rewarding, and banished starvation from American experience in contrast to most of the rest of the world. This was a productive benevolent NATURAL order, for freedom is natural; yet Progressive idealaists hate, smear and want to destroy the voluntary order. This is why they defame the most successful producers and innovators of a system they hope will fail.
When I encounter claims that the "ruthless" or "greedy" Rockefeller wanted to capture medicine to sell more oil, I defend Rockefeller (and would any other defamed capitalist achiever) for the sake of upholding what I know is just and right. If those claims had not been written here, I would not have responded here.
That Rockefeller was a Progressive in his ethical-political beliefs is pretty obvious, and unless one were an active and questioning thinker, one would most likely get carried along with such a cultural current. Should one think and question (at least quietly, in one's mind)? Yes. Did Rockefeller do this when it came to ideas concerning politics-ethics and medical science? No. Was he wrong not to have questioned and thought carefully? Yes. Is this important? Yes.
Was Rockefeller wrong to lobby politicians, fund a big campaign to regiment thinking in medical science and crusade to impose medical professional licensing and accredidation requirements for medical schools (policed by the AMA)? Yes. Was he wrong to massively fund state-run universities that don't pay their own way, as does any business or individual but depend on endless tax dollar funding (and foundation grants)? Yes, because such universities destory academic freedom in obedience to political elites and big contributors such as Rockefeller. They then install and promote, to the exclusion of more rational intellectuals, pseudo-intellectuals who promote irrationalism in science, economic philosophy, history, physics and philosophy itself. No wonder we're in the mess we struggle with today.
Rockefeller deserves his share of blame, but he was hardly alone and certainly not the Prime Mover of a vast cultural and philosophical change.
All freedoms, properly defined, are interdependent. Take away property rights in the name of punishing successful large businesses and one thereby interfers with freedom of speech, since any platform is a form of property. Regulate social behavior in the name of "equality" and one thereby deprives people of the right of freedom of association. Turn over education to the state and one loses the opportunity to learn of competing out-of-favor ideas, because dissenters are shunned and banned from the state-controlled institutions of "learning" (propaganda).
Was Rockefeller sincere? I assume he was and have seen no evidence to the contrary. All sorts of people sincerely "believe" all sorts of nonsense all the time. Why would he be different? Was he responsible for the support of government regulation by "political doctors" of the AMA? I know of no evidence this is true, but no doubt he deployed money in pusuit of this false ideal. The pro-regulatory movement seen in medicine and science was running amouck everywhere. Economic freedom (and actually reason) were under attack by progressives on all fronts: education, "trust busting", railroad fares, labor wages, special legal privileges granted to labot unions, zoning ordiances and on and on. All this fervor for state control came about at once, in a well spring of European ideals. The regulation and ruination of medical thinking and practice was hardly unique. Roosevelt swam with the tide; he did not cause it.
My defense of Rockefeller relates to his business genius and success, which was a great achievement of rationality, productivity, intelligence, self reliance, good and hard work, and so on. His genuis, and that of other business geniuses, brought about enormous material improvements for many millions of people.
My criticism of Rockefeller relates to his stupid and destructive political lobbying against individual intellectual soverignty (by forcing his favored curriculum on aspiring doctors lest they be "misled"). Did he know anything about the proper epistemology of scientific reasoning? Obviously not. Did he actually understand the Big New Ideas he set out to promote and impose? I doubt it. Rockefeller's neglect of his responsibility to think critically about the (unsound) reasoning supporting this trendy nonsense contributed, to some degree, to the human causualties of the failed hypothesis of germ theory.
My previous reference to "a great and noble cause" was my attempt to see things as he may have, not because it was really great and noble. Misguided ideologues always believe (or tell themselves they believe) in virtue.
Whenever, in my 3 posts on this subject, I criticized "progressives", I had in mind the ideology and historical movement, not any particular person on this thread. I did criticize certain accusations made against Rockefeller, in a way I hoped would explain why those were misleading and wrong, which tied in to the Progressive Movement. Thanks. Done now.
There you go again:
"People who do not understand sound economic philosophy, (for whatever their reasons) sometimes repeat this thematic viciousness"
"yet they can't define the idea nor explain how a predatory monopoly could arise in a free market in which people retain their right to say "no thanks"
People have been intentionally duped into wanting modern "healthcare". And the right to say "no thanks" is not nearly as simple as you suggest. My mother is afraid not to follow her MD's advice lest she be cut off from having a doctor at all. Many are in the same boat. And many, as I'm sure you realize, have been coerced into jabs and this didn't just begin with fake-covid!
I don't have time to read the rest of your extremely long comment and not interested in economics.
Christine, you have not understood much of anything I wrote. Doesn't much matter. Cheers.
95% of the stone age medical mafia has no proof of anything. The medical system is one gigantic anti-human operation. Health was never the goal.
Great work Christine Massey!
I will review Amit's work.
The word is out to millions. In my travels about 30% of people I meet are open to learning more about the Virology scam that we have been enslaved by.
I will never stop sharing your work!
Truth, Love, Justice and Freedom!
contagionhoax.com
That's great to hear, thank you Doug!
Truly incredible! We have all been had to an extent most (myself included) cannot quite comprehend yet.
I decided to mail my deceased wife's Rabbi your Post. She died as a result of Covid insanity in June 2023. I emailed him information the start of the Pandemic. He followed orders from who knows and said he was injecting. Maybe he can't connect dots. I have noticed a reduction in attendance when I do attend services. People I have known over 26 years who always attend on a given Friday night I do not see when I go.
I'm so sorry to hear you lost your wife, Stegiel. May she rest in peace.
Thank you for sharing the post and your experiences. It's alarming, for sure.
LOL !!
Good job, as usual, CM.
Very sobering stuff...
Give it a day or two and someone will label Amit anti semitic for exposing the “virus" lie kept under wraps by an Israeli Stealth Ministry.
I was thinking the same!
Right?!
Zurawell is a new name to me, I'll look up the interview w Bailey. Interesting topic to me. I'm grateful RFK is exiting the biggest stage if that's how he feels about so many tens of thousands of Palestinian kids and their families. The Western massacre. And after all he knows, he still claims viruses exist. I'm left guessing! I can't research my way out of it and that's why such ppl are so monstrous. It's the kind of dead end provided by Critical Theory; complete nonsense yet the believers presume to take the high road. Freedom movement's tainted all over with the big & otherwise names claiming "virus". Every time we take the sign down they put another one back up! Latest one catches my eye is George Webb. Same pattern. His motto is follow the metadata yet says virus so proudly makes me wonder if he's paid a quota. Such ppl Not being compromised doesn't seem possible to me. What IS possible is influencers doing *whatever* 95% of the time, but very well paid to keep the word/concept alive where it's existence is most called into question. Plenty of controlled ops would gladly sleep in rental cars for a crazy salary under the table. ""I'm a citizen journalist on a shoestring budget"" mm hmm. Or there's Tucker born into stupid stupid $ that's the presumed hero of the freedom types having taken hundreds of millions from blackrock/msm and now from WEF/X with that painted-on confounded look. Every few months I see Mike Adams and Alex J are saying "Hey trump this is it! No more trumpy trump messaging from us if you keep pushing the jibby jabs. We mean it again". It never ends. I like you Christine Massey and that hasn't changed so thank you.
I hear you, it's frustrating for sure. Thank god the pseudoscience is being revealed without their help.. and well Mike Adams actually recently made clear "no viruses at all" statements with Alec Zeck and Mike Winner, which was wonderful.
Jesse is a great guy. He used to be with TNT Radio and is now doing his own thing and is firmly grounded in reality re "viruses"... even named his platform "The Methods Section". He's interviewed numerous no-virus people, some of us more than once.
Certainly I remember Adams doing a pretty long segment on no-viruses around July 6 '22 soon after an interview with someone, maybe you or he did one with Cowan and Kaufman together.
I did one with him, and he did one with both Tom and Andy, but very recently he was with Alec Zeck and seems to fully get it now. Nice that he could admit he was initially wrong.
Good rant! To be fair, I wonder if sometimes people try to be "nice." I'm kinda over that, but not over being CIVIL. ;) I DO think that it's likely things are getting a bit wilder and wilder as the awareness of "Covid" being a falsity grows... The Nasties get itchy when they think about Mussolini... Let 'em itch, sez the bitch. Woof. I chew they bootox arf.
Idk what you said.
Nothing rude to you, lol. It's Doggish, not everyone speaks it... mostly dogs.
What I said has to do with biting the Nasties on they backside, many times... ;)
I do believe in MOCKERY and saying very rude things about psycho A-holes....
#plandemic black comedy:
The lawyers from the most jabbed African nation condemn the most jabbed country of the world being genocidal.
The thing was launched in December 2019. We now have February 2024. A long stretch of the promised two weeks to flatten the curve.
The whole world was stopped by a handful of organizations in all its interactions and transactions, from family relationships to international trade. If we checked it diligently (FOIA?), we would probably learn that the whole Solar System was stopped in 2020 and reset, in a complimentary move to that single decision which made the geocentric concept illegal and punishable and replaced by the new heliocentric theory which glorified a yesterday’s bad actor - was it the original great reset?
With the unprecedented consolidation of the humanity into “One Earth One Suffering” coalition, we entered a new era of the scientific development in which reason is no longer necessary, evidence is no longer considered of any use, procedures turned into rituals. It all looks like another part of “The Thing” story: there is something there, it is invisible, but it is bad. After four years, the story changed: FOIA documents show that the only thing that exists is the scenario, but it is great in redeveloping the landscape of the whole world.
Consequently, since the science does not need any evidence any more, the social contract under which people interact with organizations has been unilaterally terminated. No documents are needed for it because there can be none when the inquired institutions reply that they don’t have any. Is it the origin of the new brave world? Are you feeling to be a free person, no longer entangled with institutions, red tape and administrative battles that eat up human energy in exchange for nothing? Is it the promised great reset, the one which sounded ominous and turns out to be a liberating glorious move?
This "new social contract" could easyly be used against the state. If institutions in science, media, gov neither need facts nor documentation anymore, why should the people, who are collectively 'the state', need them?
If science can't give facts upon which authorities rule out decisions, why should the individual be compelled to show proof, for example medical excemptions, to escape the authorities' rules?
Because the society system in which we live is actually monarchy, although renamed for convenience as capitalism, democracy or socialism. All countries of the world are monarchies because the use of violence (physical force) is legally reserved only to the state. The people have no legal right to defend themselves or even passively resist - compliance is the only behavior the state accepts.
We live in an ocean of fiction, but we do not want to see it for what it is. We choose this or that person or party to support in an illusion that by advocating for them they will protect us in return. They won’t. No matter whom you support, they will demand your money and servitude the same. We are slaves to the state, and this is our reality. Fancy words don’t change it.
Is it good or bad? Neither. It is what it is. You always have a choice to go with it and be a good citizen or to oppose it and become a criminal, with all consequences of either of these decisions. The so called social contract is merely an illusion that the state owns you something in return for your own illusions (taxation, “free” benefits, education, pension, safety, etc.). Wars (initiated without asking for your opinion and demanding certain concessions on your part without compensation or even a right to challenge) prove that social contract does not exist. But we feel better dreaming about it.
I love your last paragraph, Dan!
A lot of things is beyond us. We don’t really know anything about the last four years because no-one of those active players has said anything. All these fantasies who manages which puppets, why and what for are funny and absurd. We only see the actions and the outcomes.
In other words, we don’t know what is happening, why and for what purpose. A climate which would make any normal person go insane within a few days. We read from reports that this process is happening, with suicide rates skyrocketing, child isolation exceeding all fears, and adult persons losing grip of the closest reality. Long term, it may turn out to be the most destructive living environment we have been in. Even a war may appeal better because the enemy is defined, the objective is defined, the measures are know, and the end result is known or expected. Is it why we are so easy to manipulate to see the enemy behind the borderline and neglect them when they are close?
With so many factors out of our hands, finding areas to work with on a personal level may be an only way to retain sanity and become stronger, despite the circumstances. Everything is double-edged, all things have two faces, or more. I see a lot of writers and podcast makers, they have become so strongly magnetized to the negative.
They won’t let go. Even if you point out their wrong logic, they are stuck in their fear mode. Even when you indicate wrong words they use, they can’t leave their fear-dominated new earning job which consists in planting the doomsday all around. They are already dead, both mentally and spiritually, they just don’t know it yet.
This is where a place for personal transformation comes in. Your single-focus effort is a great example of it. I bet there are times when you are laughing out loud seeing all these letters from self-respecting pseudo-scientists ornamented with plenty of letters. In a strange way, this is a huge comedy performance - the whole world believes in something which the main players say does not exist. Wow.
I agree with a lot of what you said in both your comments. We are living in the "me, me, me, participation trophy" world. Now everyone is herded into their own little words (phones) It really is a form of insanity. I'm thankful for my sense of humor and my humble spirit, it helps watching the show.
Viewed from the sidewalk, we are losing (we have already lost?) the game of life. Historically, adults brought up children in a way similar to their own styles, in the silent anticipation of their children growing into responsible persons who can and are willing to both manage their own life and supervise their elderly parents and neighbors. Sort of a generational relay race: we are giving you about 40-60 years of our combined lives (father + mother) so that you could do the same when your time is due.
This model functioned perfectly and ensured smooth transition from generation to generation, with tolerance for occasional outcasts who choose or have to (for organic reasons) live at the expense of others and give nothing in return.
There was a safeguard preventing the destruction of this model, which was the presumed educational cycle based on training, apprenticeship and gradual acquisition of professional knowledge. Old school, from cleaning the floor to managing the business, will all interim steps learned first-hand.
This model was deliberately destroyed with the introduction of the so called social media and opening the publishing cycle (initially through YT) to amateurs sharing the secrets of various trades - in detail and for free. The sharing virus spread like wildfire and is now covering literally every aspect of business, professional or technical fields, including car repairs, surgery or high-end business management. Teachers, tutors, guides, mentors, all are now outdated: they are all inefficient, and their teaching styles are pure waste of time and energy for the student. With this disruption, respect for the elderly or professionals who have real-life expertise has disappeared.
Younger generations happily isolate themselves from the older ones because they truly cannot benefit from these relations. Older generations tend to live in the past, which in itself is a bad approach, but in the face of the disconnect it becomes a depression factor which is insurmountable.
Life-cycle-wide, we are dying out. The only way out is to create small communities, literally cults and sects, which share objectives and rituals and provide support and strength to each other. But this life style is openly attacked from all sides, including professional environments. We appear to be doomed to become an Earth of isolated individuals. Creating meaningful family relationships under such conditions is out of question. We are on the final straight, although we deny it fiercely.
From this vantage point, watching the show is equivalent to a silent suicide. Without higher awareness and understanding of these processes, the whole thing is no fun.
I feel ya, brotha. Especially about the teachers and elders thing. I've had so many good teachers in my time here. Including 2 parents who did the best they could, far from perfect but now that I'm a man, I'm sooo thankful for them. You got me looking back at my life, it's full of great teachers/elders/mentors, I truly wasted a lot of my life with a very bad path which most recently I've changed. I was led astray by my emotions and this society told me I was right. I was wrong. So wrong. I should be dead. So now, I'm a different man. I've always been this guy at my core, he's always been there, I let the darkness guide me for most of my adult life, not anymore. Game recognize game. Evil recognize evil. Fear has been let loose unto all of us. Many are far from able to handle it and many don't know and will never know any different. They are pretty much evil incarnation. I hope you don't stay bummed out, my friend. If you do, they're winning. I hope there is light in your life
Great words, Mike. Finding this inner strength is not always easy, but keeping it on the top of adverse circumstances, that’s a high art. What you call “evil incarnation”, I see as not human any more. Sort of, everyone being born with the capacity to bring out this light spark during the lifetime, but not all meet this destination and some slowly deny it. I don’t see it as bad or wrong, this is the life we have. Maybe it has been designed in this way so that we could overcome this and rise to be the light. Take care.
Even rocks change. They WILL let go, eventually. They'll have to. There is no entropy in this, at least, not for long! And I do understand the sort of despair you're describing, but I tell you this... That, too, is transitory. Hang in there, and think POSITIVE... because it matters.