Handy hints for earthlings who wish to avoid enslavement and death

Introduction

About the Author: I'm an earthling, as far as I know (which is not much, as evidenced by the title of this blog), age 78 as of this writing. I have experienced much in those years, and have decided to record the most useful parts of that experience for the edification of whoever might read these words.

In my lifetime so far, I have held many beliefs and opinions which I have felt obliged to discard or modify when confronted with sufficient evidence. Many of my fellow earthlings have not made a similar effort to make such corrections, for a variety of reasons, none of them helpful to themselves or others. I endeavor to be as helpful as possible within my limitations. As Fox Mulder often said, "the truth is out there." Very far out, more often than not, and it's unwise to ignore it if you find it.

What I've learned so far would fill many books, but rather than write one I will simply provide hyperlinks or references to sources I've found to be most useful and trustworthy. You must be the judges of their contents. Many of these sources are not widely recognized as being either useful or trustworthy, for reasons which will soon become obvious.

How most people accumulate their beliefs and opinions

As children, we learn from our parents, teachers, and communities; friends, enemies, and experiences. As we grow older, we learn from independent reading and, increasingly, electronic media. The best education is designed to teach us how to learn, so we may discern when we are acquiring knowledge and not being manipulated by propaganda. Unfortunately, the primary motivation of the controllers of our key cultural institutions is to maintain their control of those institutions to infinitely expand their wealth and power. It's my observation that these institutions include all levels of education, our economic systems, governmental and corporate structures (now effectively united), and religious institutions.

A key enabler of this control is the universal use of deception The success of this universal deception is evidenced everywhere one looks if one can lean to see through it. I will point out examples as we go.

The most effective means of mind control

Many are familiar with the techniques practiced by the masters of propaganda of Hitler's "Third Reich."

(Provide reference)

Few are aware of a more fundamental technique, portrayed in George Orwell's 1984 (see https://orwell.ru/library/novels/1984/english/en_app) for a deep dive), in which language itself is manipulated and distorted so that clear, logical thinking becomes impossible. That's the ultimate means of mind control: language control. To corrupt a language is to corrupt thought. Do you wonder if, or how, our language is corrupted, and how damaging the results of such corruption might be (even after former Trump spokesperson Kellyanne Conway introduced us to the concept of "alternative facts," a phrase right out of 1984)? 

Here's a key example of "creeping newspeak" which has been used for decades by the kleptocrats who have captured our government for power and profit: the phrase "Federal Deficit" and the closely-related phrase "federal budget deficit." The word deficit carries a negative, dangerous vibe; its synonyms include shortfall, deficiency, shortage, undersupply, slippage, indebtedness, debt, arrears, negative amount, and loss—all things to be avoided in one's personal finances, as well as in state, local and corporate finance. The second phrase (federal budget deficit) is usually shortened to "budget deficit," as if all budget deficits are of the same character. This consistent imprecision is intentionally deceptive, pruning out more precise words to reduce the likelihood of that deception being perceived. The unconscious message: all deficits are the same (see that list of synonyms above).

"Fake News" and Propaganda

After finding this URL, https://taskandpurpose.com/news/dont-get-trapped-by-fake-news-blue-falcons/, I responded with a comment which began:

"I'm a Vietnam-era vet (USNR) and have mixed feelings about a site you feature as an example of a questionable site which should be taken with more than a grain of salt (VeteransToday.com). As an enlisted man with no ambitions to advance, I looked forward to the end of my 2 years of active duty. During those years, I experienced being told things by my superiors which turned out to be false. There's "need-to-know" and then there's just BS to cover up (ahem) untruths deemed necessary to satisfy control requirements of underlings (more subtle and effective than "you didn't see/hear that"). Remarkably, there have been moments of candor where official spokespeople have admitted that "the government has a right to lie" when "matters of national security" are involved. As Wikipedia reports, "historically, propaganda had been a neutral descriptive term of any material that promotes certain opinions or ideologies." Today, it's primarily used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented. I'm now 78; when I was 18, I heard the news that JFK had been shot and killed. Initial news reports quickly settled on an official narrative: a lone gunman named Oswald was the shooter." 

(Exceeding their length limit for comments, I ended with "Continued on my blog, EverythingIknewWasWrong.blogspot.com." This blog entry is what I would have entered there, if there was no limit.)

I'm a Vietnam-era vet (USNR) and have mixed feelings about a site you feature as an example of a questionable site which should be taken with more than a grain of salt (VeteransToday.com). As an enlisted man with no ambitions to advance, I looked forward to the end of my 2 years of active duty. During those years, I experienced being told things by my superiors which turned out to be false. There's "need-to-know" and then there's just BS to cover up (ahem) untruths deemed necessary to satisfy control requirements of underlings (more subtle and effective than "you didn't see/hear that"). Remarkably, there have been moments of candor where official spokespeople have admitted that "the government has a right to lie" when "matters of national security" are involved. As Wikipedia reports, "historically, propaganda had been a neutral descriptive term of any material that promotes certain opinions or ideologies." Today, it's primarily used to influence or persuade an audience so as to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented. 

I'm now 79; when I was 18, I heard the news that JFK had been shot and killed. That event, its aftermath and my search for truth since then has shaped the way I evaluate any new information. Here’s why.

Initial news reports about the assassination quickly settled on an official narrative: a lone gunman named Oswald was the shooter. It would be 20 years until the internet’s “World Wide Web” became available to the general public for information searching. Mass Media was the primary source of timely information for local and world affairs, through 3 national TV networks, metropolitan and national newspapers and magazines, syndicated news services and radio stations. Most Americans got nearly all their information from the same set of sources. Everyone wanted to know who killed our president, the sooner the better, and the mass media did not disappoint. It was also an era when public trust of this media was quite high.

Even with that high level of trust in mass media (which no longer exists, replaced by assertions  from all sides that the “news” is fake until proven otherwise), skepticism of that original official story ran high. The Warren Commission was established ostensibly to find the truth, but it became obvious to young and old that its real purpose was to disprove any evidence that more than one shooter was involved—because more than one shooter, by definition, required a conspiracy—a coordinated group effort. This purpose was even acknowledged in some official quarters on the imperative of “national security;” the Cold War was still in full swing then, with Khrushchev’s words in 1961 of “We will bury you” still ringing in the national ear. The United States had claimed the mantle, as it still does, of “leader of the free world;” if a conspiracy to assassinate a US President could be traced to a source inside the government, that leadership might be fatally weakened. (The CIA had been implicated in assassinations of many foreign leaders, and JFK had made many enemies in his thousand days in office, including the CIA.) 

It was thus deemed essential that no presidential assassination conspiracy be considered. The facts of the case were then manipulated to match the desired conclusion—a lone gunman was the only permissible conclusion, and any other conclusion had to be given the pejorative, even treasonous, label of (say it with me) “a conspiracy theory.”

In the years since the assassination, ample and convincing evidence has accumulated of such a conspiracy, as has continuing official denial of that evidence. After 21 years, the phrase has maintained its pejorative status, despite all reason, and the reasons for that label are unknown to those too young to remember JFK.

Those like me who were young at the time may remember the fear connected with becoming a skeptic of that “mother of all conspiracy theories.” Once the mass media had proclaimed the national-security imperative of “conspiracy denial,” it seemed our entire culture adopted that imperative; those who spoke out against it lost their status in their community, their feeling of safety, even their jobs (or ability to regain employment). Imagine yourself waking up to a world in which your national leaders and the corporations who employed most Americans of the middle and upper classes were enforcing a status quo in which a President who did not “get with the program” could be liquidated like the leader of a “banana republic.” Would you protest, or quietly cower in fear of your life and livelihood? If you were the breadwinner of your family (in those days there was only one), which would you choose? If you were in school, would you stand up to the derision of your classmates, or keep silent? I know what I did, and I’m not proud of it. 

Today, "our government" is financially and (by default) morally supporting Israeli Zionist propaganda designed to conceal by repeatedly denying the obvious truth (admitted in past and present, by Israel, but suppressed in the dominant Western news media) that Israel's goal since 1948 has been to erase the existence and history of Palestine, a total erasure of a semitic population who have lived there for generations, usually in peace with their neighbors.

(Expand on the theme, reusing prewritten items when possible.)

The power is in your hands.

 Good news about the November election. As the saying goes, “Man plans, God laughs.” Will the prize go to the man who says, “Netanyahu must finish the job,” or the woman who says “Israel has the right to defend itself” (and supports Joe “I have always been a Zionist” Biden’s continuing arms shipmen’s to the man he affectionately calls “Bibi,” including bunker-buster bombs, while talking tough in public about “minimizing civilian casualties”—criminally absurd, given “Bibi’s” declarations about the second “Nakba” and the Knesset speeches about there being “no innocent Palestinians.” 

Watch what the IDF does, the crimes against man and God they commit on a daily basis, not the lies they repeat for foreign consumption: IDF snipers aiming at the heads of women, children and babies, bombing refugees in their tents, huddling where they were told to evacuate to, cutting off food, water and medicines, bombing churches, mosques, the last remaining hospitals, schools, all remaining infrastructure, ambulances, rescue workers, doctors, refusing to even seriously talk about ceasefires…no surprises here, this slow-motion holocaust has been grinding on according to plan since 1948. Most of us believe that we have only a “choice” between Red death and Blue death, under one management. I believe “most of us are dead wrong.

There IS another choice—a real one: the Green choice—“People, Planet, Peace.” America does not have a “democracy,” we have the Electoral College, a system designed by our white, male, landowning (and usually slaveowning) “founding fathers” to preserve their wealth and power. 

The surprising good news—our captured and compromised Supreme Court has given Biden a gift: total immunity from prosecution for any official act committed while President. 

This ruling applies to the sitting president, not just to the next one. He (or she) could abolish the Electoral College and found our first REAL democracy, to represent (for the first time) We The People. Why the hell not? Then, we could elect the only real anti-holocaust candidate, Jill Stein. 

For those who recoil in horror at the thought of not voting for Harris, because you be would effectively be “voting for Trump,” NONSENSE. It’s the Electoral College, dummy, which determines who wins. If you oppose genocide, Jill Stein is your only choice. An exercise in futility? She can never outspend or overcome the money and power of the “duopoly” (AKA the kleptocrat owners of the phony “2-party system”)? If every opponent of genocide voted their conscience, that would not be true. If Jill is on your ballot, you literally have no reason NOT to vote Green.

Do you fear that voting Green will have unintended consequences, like bankrupting the country should Congress pass the “Green Agenda?” How tragic that would be. Would we suffer ruinous inflation? Be forced to fund free education and health care for all? Would our military budget shrink to far below its current level of ten times that of all other countries combined? Oh, the horror, should peace break out. Relax, the economic consequences of that scenario would be the opposite of what we have been trained to fear by the Military-Industrial complex Ike warned us of (and now has all of us on a gaslighting-powered leash).

Most of us don’t know of or understand how our macroeconomic (“fiat money”) system works (it’s called “MMT.” A one-stop educational resource to dissolve that leash may be found at RealProgressives.org). Our collective ignorance provides the strength of the kleptocrats’ leash. 

RFK Sr. once said, “Others see what is, and say “why?” I see what has never been, and say: WHY NOT?” YOU have the power to change the world in your hands. 

If you would like to learn more about this very possible future, and would like to listen to a podcast, here’s the link: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/macro-n-cheese/id1453085489?i=1000673674948