Watch: Alex Jones Explodes On Globalists Dragging America Into Endless Wars
Alex Jones joined podcast host Lauren Chen for an interview this week touching on the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, the 2024 election, tensions in the Middle East and more.
In a video clip posted online, Jones ranted about wanting America to be left out of foreign conflicts.
Regarding Israel’s current bombardment of Palestine and feud with Iran, Jones vented, “Great Israel. I’m not against you, just leave me alone! Go have your endless war with the Muslims, kill each other all day long, have your nuclear weapons… Don’t try to get me in a war with Iran!”
“Go have your endless war with the Muslims. Kill each other all day long. Have your nuclear weapons, run around. Just leave me alone!”
— Lauren Chen (@TheLaurenChen) August 9, 2024
Like most Americans, @RealAlexJones is sick and tired of being pulled into Israel’s regional conflicts. pic.twitter.com/DwQm8XoXJ5
“I’m indifferent to Iran, I’m indifferent to Syria, I’m indifferent to Israel, I’m indifferent to Somalia, and I don’t want a bunch of people coming here and bitching about how bad I am all day,” he added.
Watch the full interview below!
Worlds Largest Study Reveals Excess Mortality Was Caused by Vaccine Mandates, Not COVID
The world’s largest ever study on the Covid-19 pandemic has found that mRNA vaccines caused a surge in excess mortality around the globe. According to scientists from Correlation Research in the Public Interest, mRNA jabs […]
The post Worlds Largest Study Reveals Excess Mortality Was Caused by Vaccine Mandates, Not COVID appeared first on The People’s Voice.
Germany: Somali Murderer Escapes after Being Taken to Cinema
An extremely dangerous Somali migrant, who had previously killed a man by stabbing and beheading him, was inexplicably let out of a psychiatric ward for an escorted visit to the cinema on Thursday, August 8th, during which he escaped, reports media outlet Nius.de.
The 22-year-old man, an asylum seeker from Somalia named Mursal Mohamed Seid, was sentenced to an indefinite stay at a psychiatric hospital in 2022, after he murdered a 52-year-old fellow resident at a homeless shelter, stabbing him 111 times with a knife, and then decapitating him.
2021 tötet Mursal Mohamed Seid einen 52-Jährigen mit 111 Messerstichen und enthauptet ihn. Der Angriff ist so gewaltsam, dass dem Opfer noch bei lebendigem Leib Innereien austreten. Heute konnte der Somalier beim Freigang fliehen – und ist auf freiem Fuß.https://t.co/gOCSBVdePC pic.twitter.com/LTN0JdlgoE
— NIUS (@niusde_) August 8, 2024
The Deggendorf regional court ruled at the time that the suspect was mentally ill, suffering from schizophrenia, and that it was unclear whether he had been able to mentally grasp the seriousness of his actions. The court had heard that Seid believed there were two demons inside his roommate that he had to kill.
His carers at the psychiatric ward of the hospital in the southern German town of Deggendorf let him out for an accompanied visit to the cinema on Thursday. The man escaped when he went to the toilet, and, after a large-scale search of the area, was found and detained eight hours later, five kilometres away. According to media reports, he did not resist arrest.
Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann expressed his outrage, telling daily Bild: “I will order a detailed investigation into why the district hospital allowed this highly dangerous man to go to the cinema at all.”
Germany has witnessed a series of brutal knife attacks around the country, committed by migrants. The country is constantly grappling with mass immigration: 352,000 asylum applications were handed in last year, and 132,000 until June of this year.
Mursal Mohamed Seid’s case is reminiscent of another Somali migrant’s crimes committed in 2021. Abdirahman Jibril, a 24-year-old homeless man, who arrived in Germany as an asylum seeker in 2015, killed three people with a kitchen knife in a shopping centre in Würzburg, Bavaria, and wounded seven others. His defence attorney said the suspect had been suffering from a psychotic episode and “voices prompted him to commit this horrible crime.”
POWERFUL MUST-WATCH: Tommy Robinson Issues Emergency Warning Concerning The Future Of The UK
‘It’s About Your Money’: New EU Vaccination Card Will be Used to Control Access to Banking, Other Services
Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst joined “The Defender In-Depth” this week to discuss the European Union’s (EU) plans for a European Vaccination Card (EVC), the plan’s similarities to the EU’s Digital COVID Certificate, the global push toward digital ID and implications for health and medical freedom.
The EU, which pioneered the development of digital “vaccine passports,” will next month launch a test run of its new EVC in five countries — Belgium, Germany, Greece, Latvia and Portugal.
The card purports to “foster informed decision-making on vaccination, and improve continuity of care across the EU” and “aims to empower individuals by consolidating all their vaccination data in one easily accessible location.”
While the objectives of the program, set to be implemented throughout the EU by 2026, appear benign, critics argue the EVC is a stepping stone for mandatory vaccinations in the future.
Some also argue the EVC is connected to large financial interests and plans to limit personal and national sovereignty.
‘The plan is to get everybody vaccinated’
For Terhorst, efforts to launch the EVC are, at their root, “about digital ID.”
“You get a digital ID where all your vaccination records are stored … All your personal details are stored in one place, and you can move it easily from one country to another without having to redo or reapply … So basically, it’s about a digital ID, and then a link from your personal ID to your medical records on vaccination,” she said.
Terhorst said that while the idea of having one’s medical records easily accessible and transferrable sounds benign, “The plan is to get everybody vaccinated and to kind of overrule constitutional rights.”
“It was very clear that the object was that anybody within the EU could not say no to … vaccination,” Terhorst said.
According to Terhorst, this contravenes the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which in Chapter 1, Article 3 — “Right to the integrity of the person” — encapsulates the key tenets of the Nuremberg Declaration.
This includes a requirement for “the free and informed consent of the person concerned” in relation to medical procedures, and “the prohibition on making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain.”
EVC a continuation of EU ‘vaccine passport’
Terhorst said that the EVC and the EU’s digital vaccination certificate are “presented as different programs,” with the EVC being “rebranded as something completely different and completely new” — even though they are both based on “the same software,” she said.
“They’ve been working on it for years and years and years. And it works perfect, and it’s all linked together like the banking infrastructure, the personal medical records, insurance, everything links into each other,” Terhorst said.
The EVC is based on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Global Digital Health Certification Network, which the EU and WHO co-launched in June 2023 to promote a global interoperable digital vaccine passport, based on the EU’s digital health certificate.
Noting that plans for the EVC were launched in 2018, before the COVID-19 pandemic, Terhorst said, “This plan is not new. It has been in the making for a very long time.”
Terhorst said the EVC threatens to usurp personal and national sovereignty.
“There was a digital roadmap for a digital passport. So basically, the EU is trying to become a kind of country or federal state that has the capacity to issue a passport to all the EU citizens,” she said.
Terhorst also connected the plans to launch the EVC with the amendments to the WHO’s International Health Regulations, passed in June at the World Health Assembly.
The amendments contain articles that “allow states to enforce medication on anybody during a crisis or emergency or pandemic,” she said. “It doesn’t say that it has to be done, but it gives this permission.”
Terhorst also connected plans for the EVC with efforts in other countries to enact new pandemic preparedness plans. She cited the example of New Zealand, which last month published an interim update to its national Pandemic Plan and which was expanded to cover “respiratory-type pathogens of pandemic potential.”
Terhorst also cited the example of Queen Máxima of the Netherlands, who at this year’s meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in January, said that digital ID is “very necessary” for the provision of a range of public services — and suggested it can be used to track the unvaccinated.
Digital ID “is very necessary for financial services, but not only. It is also good for school enrollment, it is also good for health — who actually got a vaccination or not,” Queen Máxima said.
“There was very intense pressure put on us to get vaccinated,” Terhorst said, referring to her experience in the Netherlands. “And then knowing that it didn’t stop transmission, why was it so important? I think still we don’t know everything, but we have to keep on digging and fighting for the truth to come out to really know why it was so important.”
Will vaccines be mandated in Europe?
Terhorst cited as one example the recent release of the “RKI Files” in Germany, named after the country’s Robert Koch Institute — the German equivalent of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The files indicated that political objectives — not science — guided pandemic decision-making in Germany.
According to Terhorst, the files made it “very clear that it was a scam — the whole COVID-19 lockdown, all the measures, closing schools, etc., didn’t have a scientific basis. And so, all the measures were based on political decisions and not on science, although the public was told that it was all based on science.”
The release of the files was significant, Terhorst said, because Germany is not just one of the five countries set to trial the EVC, but is also Europe’s economic leader and the home country of scandal-ridden European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The European Commission is the EU’s executive branch.
“Germany has played a very important role in the COVID-19 period,” Terhors said. “And of course, von der Leyen is German, and she is the head of the European Commission … She is very much in favor of vaccination, and so, she will push as much as she can to let this digital vaccination passport be a success, and even, I think, to try to force people to get vaccinated.”
Terhorst cited vaccine-related scandals and legal challenges implicating von der Leyen. Last month, the European Court of Justice ruled that the European Commission’s decision to heavily redact key portions of COVID-19 vaccine contracts with pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic violated the commission’s transparency obligations.
‘A direct threat for every citizen’
Terhorst said prominent financial interests are behind the public health rhetoric promoting initiatives such as the EVC.
She referenced recent remarks by Catherine Austin Fitts, founder and publisher of the Solari Reportand former U.S. assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development, who told The Defender the EVC represents “another step toward asserting control of labor and travel, with a goal to controlling resources and assets.”
“The goal is financial control,” Fitts said. “There is no legitimate public health purpose. The central bankers are hiding behind a health narrative — policies like lockdown are a way to manage inflation and resource demand when monetary policy is highly inflationary.”
“It’s one big conglomerate which is ruling the world, and it’s this conglomerate which wants a change of the financial system,” Terhorst said. “And the change they want to have is that they can decide how much money you have in your own bank account with the CBDC,” central bank digital currency.
“So basically, and this is I think very important for everybody to realize, it’s not about health, it’s about your money,” Terhorst said. “They want to make you into a kind of minion as somebody who’s not having real rights.”
“What the politic is moving towards — it’s much more towards a government or a political system where you have no rights and also you have no ownership and you have no right to say no,” Terhorst added.
Noting that influential organizations such as the WEF and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have supported efforts to develop digital ID and digital vaccine passports, Terhorst said “Such an accumulation of power … is just incredible and it’s a direct threat for every citizen.”
“The threat is that anybody objecting to vaccination, especially when there will be a new crisis [like] we’ve seen with COVID-19, then … perhaps your bank could say, well, then you cannot have access to your bank account,” Terhorst said, citing Canadian banks who froze the accounts of participants in the 2022 Freedom Convoy.
POWERFUL MUST-WATCH: Tommy Robinson Issues Emergency Warning Concerning The Future Of The UK
Friday Live: Trump Warns Kamala Ukraine Policies Could Spark WWIII
“The American Journal” is live every weekday from 8-11 am CST.
Former President Donald Trump told Breitbart News exclusively on Thursday that he fears a Kamala Harris presidency would lead to World War III due to her stances on the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Follow The American Journal on Telegram:
Government Spending Millions on ‘Cognitive Vaccines’ to ‘Protect’ Public from ‘Fringe’ Viewpoints
How can we restore trust in our public institutions — governments, universities, media, science and medicine — when the government spends $100 million to create “cognitive vaccines”: a mix of propaganda and censorship strategies designed to “protect” the public from dissenting viewpoints?
This question was the focal point of the “Council of the Canceled,” a discussion broadcast live on X (formerly Twitter) on Wednesday, hosted by Nicole Shanahan and featuring Dr. Jay Bhattacharya,Eric Weinstein, Ph.D., and Mike Benz.
The panel — experts who have faced censorship and de-platforming — delved into the complex web of government-funded research, corporate interests and institutional practices they allege are eroding public trust and stifling the debate that is indispensable to science and democracy.
“We’d like to restructure consensus-building so that … governance represents the people,” said Shanahan, a Silicon Valley tech entrepreneur and the vice-presidential running mate of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) chairman on leave.
The participants explored how this might be achieved in the face of what they described as coordinated efforts to control public opinion and suppress alternative viewpoints.
Benz, a former U.S. Department of State official and founder of Foundation for Freedom Online, discussed the concept of cognitive or psychological “vaccines” developed by academic institutions with government funding.
“They have glitzy 10-minute promo videos,” he said, describing attempts to create psychological inoculations against what authorities deem “fake news.”
The panelists agreed that these programs, far from protecting democracy, are undermining it by attempting to preemptively discredit dissenting voices.
Dissenting voices often labeled as fringe or dangerous
The panel painted a stark picture of eroding trust across multiple pillars of society: government, media, universities and scientific institutions. Each speaker shared experiences and insights illustrating how actions meant to build consensus have instead fostered skepticism and distrust.
Bhattacharya, a Stanford University professor of health policy, shared his experience of how institutional narrative control has undermined credibility in public health.
He pointed to the Great Barrington Declaration that he co-authored, which the Center for Science and Democracy labeled a “fringe idea” because it advocated for focused protection of vulnerable individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The declaration was signed by 30,000 medical and public health scientists and practitioners and over 1 million others.
Benz pointed to the amendment of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which lifted the ban against domestic dissemination of U.S. government-produced propaganda, giving rise to the censorship-industrial complex.
Weinstein, a mathematician, economist and founder of The Portal Group, described how academic institutions have become entangled with national security interests.
He shared an anecdote about the University of Chicago’s economics department, suggesting it was partially set up as a “bulwark against totalitarian communism, funded from inside the intelligence world.”
This intertwining of academia and national security, he argued, has led to a situation where dissenting voices are often labeled as fringe or dangerous.
“There’s this thing with an adjective, a profession, and then a proper name,” he said, giving the examples of “fringe epidemiologist Jay Bhattacharya” and “controversial professor Jordan Peterson” — labels meant to signal the public to be skeptical of or avoid such individuals.
The panel also discussed the erosion of trust in science, particularly in light of controversial research practices.
Bhattacharya brought up gain-of-function research. “Tony Fauci signed off on these experiments,” he said, mentioning that in a 2012 paper Fauci “explicitly wrote that even if these experiments result in a worldwide pandemic, it’ll be worth it because of the knowledge gained.”
The panelists also discussed how de-platforming, narrative control and censorship have contributed to a loss of faith in traditional media outlets that were once trusted to be objective and unbiased.
Google ‘censoring dissenting opinions while cashing out’
The panelists examined the complex interplay between government agencies, tech giants and academic institutions in controlling information flow.
Benz highlighted lesser-known government initiatives aimed at shaping public opinion, such as the National Science Foundation’s Convergence Accelerator Track F program — “Course Correct: Precision Guidance Against Misinformation” — and the Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace Program.
“These programs distributed $100 million to this web of universities,” Benz explained, detailing how this research often focuses on developing strategies to counter narratives that challenge the institutional consensus.
Benz criticized the U.K.-developed Misinformation Susceptibility Test as “the most ridiculous, politically rigged” tool that could be used to justify increased censorship of certain groups.
Weinstein touched on lesser-known aspects of American history, particularly regarding information control and civil liberties.
“We don’t even know that there’s a secret history of the McCarran [Internal Security] Act,” he said, explaining that this act, passed in the 1950s, sought to apply tactics used during the Japanese American internment to a new perceived threat.
According to Weinstein, the act aimed to set up detention camps for suspected communists, mirroring what some in the national security establishment viewed as a successful strategy during World War II.
Shanahan pointed out potential conflicts of interest in how information is controlled on major social platforms. “Google is a major investor in vaccines. So they’re both censoring dissenting opinions while cashing out.”
Benz introduced the concept of a nongovernmental organization “soft-power swarm army” — a network of organizations and institutions working in concert with government agencies to shape public opinion.
He quoted a high-ranking official to illustrate the mindset behind these efforts. “You have this situation where hate speech gives rise to ethnocentrism, which gives rise to nationalism, which gives rise to opposition to the rules-based international world order.”
Those in power do not want the civilian class to speak freely online for fear of losing control of this order, according to Benz.
‘Cowboy culture is all about challenging each other’
Dissent is critical for maintaining healthy scientific discourse and democratic institutions, the panelists said.
Bhattacharya highlighted the historical importance of scientific dissent, citing the example of Frances Kelsey, M.D., Ph.D., a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scientist who prevented the approval of the dangerous pregnancy drug thalidomide in the U.S.
“She worked for the FDA and … was just an honest scientist inside the FDA bureaucracy,” Bhattacharya explained.
Weinstein expanded on this theme, emphasizing the unique strength that dissent has historically given American institutions.
“How did the U.S. as a young country end up with the lion’s share of the world’s great research institutions?” he asked. “The short answer is ‘dissent.’ Cowboy culture … is all about challenging each other and going out for a drink afterwards.”
The need for a ‘whole-society freedom alliance’
The panelists offered several strategies to address the challenge of reforming public institutions.
Bhattacharya emphasized the importance of political engagement. “You can ask your … congressional candidates, ‘Where do you stand on free speech? Where do you stand on the censorship complex? Where do you stand on regulation of science?’”
Shanahan called for a restructuring of scientific publishing and peer review processes. “We are due for a new model of publishing and reviewing scientific literature.”
Weinstein suggested creating a glossary of terms to help the public understand the language used in national security and information control contexts. “We have to arm ourselves with the information, the terminology and the history.”
Benz advocated for a “whole-society freedom alliance” approach similar to what arose during the pandemic, including congressional committees, state attorneys general, private sector lawyers, alternative media and others who are “able to do their part.”
POWERFUL MUST-WATCH: Tommy Robinson Issues Emergency Warning Concerning The Future Of The UK