Survivors of Oct. 7 Music Rave Massacre Sue Israel For Negligence
Dozens of injured survivors of the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre at a music festival close to the Gaza Strip have filed a $56 million suit against the Israeli government, alleging various forms of negligence that resulted in unavoidable casualties.
Declaring that “the negligence and the gross oversight is beyond belief,” the 42 plaintiffs have targeted four government entities: the Israeli Defense Forces, the Shin Bet internal security service, the Defense Ministry, and Israel Police. According to the suit, 364 attendees were killed and 40 kidnapped and taken to Gaza.
#BREAKING Israel music festival-goers fled in hail of bullets
— IMedia (@imediaxyz) October 8, 2023
People tried to flee the site, running across the sand and getting into their cars to drive away. Partygoers said there were jeeps full of gunmen, shooting at the cars.
Over 260 bodies were found at the site of the… pic.twitter.com/RvgOuxAodr
The IDF conducted two security assessments over the night leading into Oct. 7, sparked by unusual observations on the border with Gaza. However, no warnings were given to the organizers of the Supernova rave — despite the fact that Shin Bet had taken the threat seriously enough that it deployed to the area soldiers from its unit responsible for thwarting abductions. It’s also been reported that military units put on alert didn’t know the festival was going on.
“A single phone call by IDF officials to the commander responsible for the party to disperse it immediately in view of the expected danger would have saved lives and prevented the physical and mental injuries of hundreds of partygoers, including the plaintiffs,” they say in their filed complaint.
In a particularly grim twist of fate, the festival was originally slated to last only two days — Oct. 5 and 6. However, earlier in the week of the event, organizers requested and were granted permission to extend it to Oct. 7. The “Gaza Division’s operations officer, Lt. Col. Sahar Fogel, opposed the extension, arguing it was a needless security risk, but was told by his superiors to approve it,” writes Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp, citing Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
The festival was held just outside the Gaza Strip, where 2 million Palestinians have lived under an Israeli blockade since 2008
An expert cited by the plaintiffs said the IDF shouldn’t have approved the festival at all, given its location: “The event was held a small distance from the Strip’s border. The noise from the party was heard by Gazan residents and revelers were an easy target for the terror attack.”
The plaintiffs also fault the police for positioning only 27 officers to secure the festival, with the great majority armed only with pistols, in an alleged failure to comply with regulations requiring long arms when deployed so close to Gaza.
According to Haaretz, the permit signed by an IDF colonel said “the northern brigade is responsible for regional security during the event in the fence space across from the Gaza Strip.” However, attendees say no soldiers were positioned there. In the most damning fact of the day, the festival came under attack at around 6:30am and the IDF didn’t arrive until 3pm.
Some of the civilian casualties from the music festival were caused by IDF Apache helicopter fire which was directed at vehicles driving into Gaza, as well as people getting out of vehicles and walking through nearby fields.
Vivek Ramaswamy Issues Emergency Warning: Southern Border Is Now A UN Invasion Frontier
US National Debt Rises Above $34 Trillion in Historic First-Ever
US national debt has surged over $34 trillion for the first time in history, according to fiscal data published by the Department of the Treasury.
As of December 29, 2023, the US national debt reached $34,001,493,655,565.48 for the first time in the history of the United States, the data showed on Tuesday.
On December 28, the US national debt stood at $33,911,227,723,170 and the Biden administration took just one day to increase the national debt by almost $100 billion, according to the data.
However, earlier findings by the Congressional Budget Office indicated that the national debt would nearly double in scale over the next 30 years.
Michael Peterson, the CEO of Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a financial firm founded by the Nixon-era secretary of commerce, noted in a statement that regardless of the new year, the US’ national debt standing “remains on the same damaging and unsustainable path.”
“Following last year’s debt ceiling deal, we quickly crossed $32 trillion in June, $33 trillion in September, and now we are soaring past $34 trillion,” he said.
“Looking ahead, debt will continue to skyrocket as the Treasury expects to borrow nearly $1 trillion more by the end of March. Adding trillion after trillion in debt, year after year, should be a flashing red warning sign to any policymaker who cares about the future of our country.”
The latest comes months after the Biden administration managed a deal with Republicans to raise the US’ national debt ceiling as a means to avoid a default, a bid that will last through January 2025. The debt level further comes on the heels of Congress’ efforts to clear additional bills to fund the government.
Forecasters had previously underscored that the national debt surpassed the $34 trillion mark years earlier than expected as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent economic fallout.
Vivek Ramaswamy Issues Emergency Warning: Southern Border Is Now A UN Invasion Frontier
Argentina Pulls Out of BRICS While Iran, Russia Abandon U.S. Dollar
Argentina has formally declined an invitation to become a member of the BRICS group of nations, as per various news media outlets on Friday, December 29, quoting an official letter they have seen which was distributed to the leaders of Russia, China, India, Brazil, and South Africa. While new Argentinian President Javier Milei had hitherto opposed joining the alliance before being elected, the latest move signified a complete U-turn from the stance of his predecessor, Alberto Fernandez.
Fernandez had welcomed the invitation to join BRICS in August, maintaining that such a move would give the Latin American nation a “new scenario” for its development. Milei, who won the presidency in November, declared at that time that he would not “push for deals with communists because they don’t respect the basic parameters of free trade, freedom, and democracy.”
The media published one of Buenos Aires’ letters on Friday that was apparently addressed to Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva. The letter said that the policy of the new Argentinian government would “differ in many cases from that of the previous government” and that some of its decisions, including “active participation in BRICS,” would be “reviewed.” None of the BRICS nations has officially verified receiving the letter so far.
Argentina’s foreign minister Diana Mondino, who was Milei’s senior economic advisor, also said that her government did not “see any advantage” in becoming a member of the group and would thus “not join BRICS.”
The letter stated at the same time that Milei’s government hopes to “intensify” bilateral relations with BRICS members, especially in the sectors of trade and investments. Formerly, the president said that, while he was not going to “align with the communists,” his government would still not prevent the Argentinian private sector from doing business with “whoever it wants.”
The South American nation is presently grappling with its worst economic crisis in decades. Inflation has skyrocketed 160 percent over the past year alone. The gravely devalued peso compelled the country to refinance its $44-billion debt with the IMF. Besides, Milei’s government is also encountering widespread protests over its radical deregulation and austerity-based reform program.
Experts Claim Global Heart Failure Pandemic Caused by New COVID Strain
Scientists are warning that a new COVID variant will cause a global “heart failure pandemic.” Many are skeptical of the claim, believing it to be a COVID vaccine injury coverup.
The globalists are increasing their attacks on Infowars and the stakes have never been higher!
Please consider donating and visit InfowarsStore.com for merch, nutraceuticals and survival gear.
Media Outlets Are Already Calling for Online 2024 Election Censorship
The page has only just been turned on 2023 and already the narrative that much policing of online speech will be vital for 2024, an election year, has already stirred.
The legacy media outlet The Guardian, in its piece about Kate Starbird, has already complained that there may be less censorship ahead of the 2024 elections, and claimed that Rep. Jim Jordan’s committee’s reports on Big Tech-government censorship collusion are based on “outlandish claims.” This is ignoring the fact that an injunction was successfully placed on the Biden administration for its censorship pressure on Big Tech, a case that will be ruled on by The Supreme Court this year.
In an era where the policing of online speech is increasingly contentious, Kate Starbird’s role in combating what she terms election misinformation has placed her squarely in the midst of a heated debate. As a leading figure at the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, Starbird has actively engaged in documenting what she and her team perceive as misinformation during the 2020 elections, particularly focusing on claims of voter fraud.
However, Starbird’s approach and her team’s actions have not been without controversy. Critics argue that their efforts amount to a form of censorship, infringing upon free speech. This criticism extends beyond Starbird’s team to a broader national trend, where researchers engaged in similar work face accusations of partisanship and censorship, challenging the principles of free expression.
Jim Jordan, chair of the House judiciary committee, has emerged as a key figure in opposing what he views as the overreach of these researchers. He has focused on investigating groups and individuals involved in counteracting misinformation, especially in the context of elections and Covid-19. Central to the controversy is the practice of working with government entities and flagging content to social media platforms, which some argue leads to undue censorship and violates First Amendment rights.
The debate over the role of anti-misinformation efforts has escalated beyond Congress, evidenced by lawsuits from the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana and from the state of Texas, along with two rightwing media companies. These legal actions challenge the alleged collaboration between the Biden administration, the Global Engagement Center, and social media companies, showing it as a constitutional breach.
Critics of Starbird’s and similar researchers’ work argue that labeling right-wing entities as primary purveyors of election lies is a biased approach that neglects the complexity of online discourse. They contend that such claims of misinformation often serve to silence dissenting voices rather than foster a balanced and open dialogue.
According to The Guardian piece, Starbird’s shift in terminology from “misinformation” to “rumors” could be seen by some as a strategic move to distance her work from the increasingly politicized nature of the term but one that could be even more contentions. The idea that rumors should be policed isn’t likely to go over well with those that are already tired of online censorship.
In a similar vein to The Guardian piece, in a New Year’s Eve episode of “Face The Nation,” CBS’s Senior Business and Technology Correspondent Jo-Ling Kent took her time to criticize Elon Musk’s X for allowing free speech. Kent notably highlighted the limitations placed on censorship due to the “arguments and protections of free speech.”
Kent criticized X for enabling figures like Alex Jones to regain a platform. “Elon Musk and his team have basically allowed the return of conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, and they’ve also dramatically reduced the size of their Trust and Safety team,” Kent stated.
Kent also stated that, on platforms like Meta’s Facebook, “the reality here is that taking down all of this bad information has always been an impossible task on platforms of that size.” Despite describing it as impossible, Kent appears to suggest they should still try.
As has always been the case, false information during an election cycle is often rife. But in the online world, where most speech runs through a handful of Big Tech giants, the power and control over online discourse that these companies have is immense. A handful of companies have the power to affect elections and the play of democracy itself.
While even Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has admitted that the companies’ online censorship has been heavy-handed, and has resulted in truthful speech being suppressed, tech giants and largely legacy media outlets that once had a monopoly on information, continue to push for online censorship.
2024: The Year Global Government Takes Shape
Global government is the endgame.
We know that.
Total control of every aspect of life for every single person on the planet, that’s the goal.
That’s been apparent to anyone paying attention for years, if not decades, and any tiny portion of remaining doubt was removed when Covid was rolled-out and members of the establishment started outright saying it.
Covid marked an acceleration of the globalist agenda, a mad dash to the finish line that seems to have lost momentum short of victory, but the race is still going. The goal has not changed, even if the years since may have seen the agenda retreat slightly back into the shadows.
We know what they want conceptually, but what does that mean practically?
What does a potential “global government” actually look like?
First off, let’s talk about what we’re NOT going to see.
1 – They are not going to declare themselves. No, there will almost certainly never be an official “world government”, at least not for a long time yet. That’s a lesson they learned from Covid — putting a name and a face on globalism only foments collective resistance to it.
2 – They’re not going to abolish nationhood. You can be sure Klaus Schwab (or whoever) isn’t ever going to appear simulcast on every television in the world announcing that we’re all citizens of ze vurld now and that nation states no longer exist.
In part because that is likely to focus resistance (see point 1), but mainly because tribalism and nationalism are just too useful to all would-be manipulators of public opinion. And, of course the continuing existence of nation states in no way precludes the existence of a supra-national control system, any more than the existence of Rhode Island, Florida or Texas precludes the existence of the Federal government.
3 – There will never be an overt declaration of a change of system. We will not be told we are united under a new model, instead the illusion of regionality & superficial variance will camouflage a lack of real choice across the political landscape. A thin polysystemic skin stretched tight over a monosystemic skeleton.
Capitalism, communism, socialism, democracy, tyranny, monarchy…these words will steadily dilute in meaning, even more than they have already, but they will never be abandoned.
What globalism will bring us – I suggest – is a collection of nation-states largely in name only, operating superficially different systems of government all built on the same underpinning assumptions and all answering to an unelected and undeclared higher authority.
…and if that sounds familiar, it’s because it’s essentially what we have already.
The only major aspects missing are the mechanisms by which this rough model can be transformed into a flowing network, where all corners are eroded and all genuine sovereign powers become entirely vestigial.
That’s where the three main pillars of global rule come in:
- Digital Money
- Digital ID
- “Climate Action”
Let’s take a look at each one in turn.
1. DIGITAL MONEY
Over 90% of the nations of the world are currently in the process of introducing a new digital currency issued by their central bank. OffG – and others – have been covering the push for a Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) for years now, to the point where we don’t need to rehash old talking points here.
Simply put, entirely digital money enables total surveillance of every transaction. If the currency is programmable, it would also allow control of every transaction.
You can read our extensive back-catalogue on CBDCs for more detail.
Clearly CBDCs are a potentially dystopian nightmare which will infringe the rights of anyone forced to use them….but how are they a building block of global government?
The answer to that is “interoperability”.
While the world’s national CBDCs will notionally be separate from one another, the majority are being coded to recognize and interact with each other. They are almost all being developed along guidelines produced by the Bank of International Settlements and other globalist financial institutions, and they are all being programed by the same handful of tech giants.
A June 2023 report for the World Economic Forum noted the importance of “Central Bank Digital Currency Global Interoperability Principles” and concluded:
It is crucial for central banks to prioritize interoperability considerations early in the design process by adhering to a set of guiding principles. To facilitate global coordination and ensure harmonious implementation of CBDCs, the development of a comprehensive set of principles and standards becomes imperative. Drawing upon previous research and collaborative efforts, this set of principles can serve as a robust foundation, guiding central banks to proactively consider interoperability from the outset of their CBDC initiatives. By adopting these principles, central banks can work towards creating a cohesive and interconnected CBDC ecosystem.
Commenting on the report, the World Economic Forum website noted [emphasis added]:
To ensure successful implementation and promote interoperability, global coordination becomes paramount […] adhering to interoperability principles, CBDCs can advance harmoniously, leading to efficient and interconnected digital payment systems.
It doesn’t take a genius to decode “global coordination”, “cohesive ecosystem”, “harmonious advancement” and “interconnected payment systems”.
There is no practical difference between 195 “interoperable” and interconnected digital currencies, and one single global currency.
In fact “interoperability” is the watchword for all globalist power structures moving forward. Which leads us neatly onto…
2. DIGITAL IDENTITY
The global push for mandatory digital identities is even older than the digital currency agenda, dating back to the turn of the century and Tony Blair’s “national identity cards”.
For decades it has been a “solution” posited to every “problem”.
Terrorism? Digital identity will keep you safe.
Illegal immigration? Digital identity will secure the border.
Pandemic? Digital identity will keep track of who is vaccinated and who is not.
AI? Digital identity will prove who’s human.
Poverty? Digital identity will “promote financial inclusion”
Clearly, just as with CBDCs, a far-reaching digital identity service is a threat to human rights. And, just as with CBDCs, if you interconnect national digital identity platforms you can build a global system.
Again, it’s all about “interoperability”. They use the exact same language.
The World Bank’s Identity4Development program claims:
Interoperability is crucial for developing efficient, sustainable, and useful identity ecosystems.
The Nordic and Baltic Ministers for Digitalization publicly called for “cross-border” operational digital IDs.
NGOs like Open Identity Exchange(OIX) are publishing reports on “the need for data standards to enable interoperability of Digital IDs both in federations within an ID ecosystem, and across ID ecosystems.”.
The list of national governments introducing digital IDs, “partnering” with corporate giants to do so and/or promoting “cross border interoperability” is long, and growing longer all the time.
In October 2023 the United Nations Development Program published their “guidelines” for the design and use of digital identities.
There is no practical difference between 195 networked digital identity platforms and one single global identity program.
OK, so they have global currency and identity programs in place. Now they can control and monitor everyone’s movements, financial transactions, health and more. That’s surveillance and control mechanism, all handled in a distributed model designed to obfuscate the very existence of a global government.
But what about policy?
How does this global government hand down policy and legislation without giving away its existence?
Climate change, that’s how.
3. “CLIMATE ACTION”
Climate Change has been at the forefront of the globalist agenda for years. It is the Trojan horse of the antihuman technocrat.
As long ago as 2010, noted Climate Change “experts” were suggesting that “humans are not evolved enough” to combat climate change and that “It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.”
More recently, in 2019, Bloomberg was publishing articles with headlines like “Climate Change Will Kill National Sovereignty As We Know It”, and academics are telling us:
States will remain unable to solve global crises like climate change until they let go of their sovereignty
For years climate change has been sold as the reason we might be “forced” to abandon democracy or sovereignty.
Alongside this, there is a prolonged propaganda narrative dedicated to changing “climate change” from an environmental issue into an everything issue.
At this point all national governments agree “climate change” is an urgent problem requiring global cooperation to solve. They host massive summits at which they sign international agreements, binding nation states to certain policies, for the sake of the planet.
Having established that model, they are now widening the “climate change” purview. Changing “climate change” into the answer to every question:
Obviously, “climate change” was always going to impact energy and transport.
Following Covid, “climate change” has already been re-branded a “health crisis”.
Now we’re being told “climate change” is generating a food crisis.
We’re being told that international trade needs to be climate conscious.
We’re being told by the World Bank that education reform will help the fight against climate change.
We’re being told by the IMF that every country in the world should tax carbon and, in a recent cross-over episode, that CBDCs can be good for the environment.
See how it works?
Agriculture & food, public health, energy & transport, trade, fiscal & taxation policy, even education. Almost every area of government is now potentially covered by the “climate change” umbrella.
They no longer need a one-world government, they just need a single panel of “impartial international climate change experts” working to save the planet.
Through the lens of “climate change”, these experts would be empowered to dictate – sorry, recommend – government policy in almost every area of life to every nation on the planet.
Do you see it yet?
This is global government in the modern world, not centralised but distributed. Cloud computing. A supranational corporate-technocrat hivemind. With no official existence or authority, and therefore no accountability, and funneling all their policy decisions through one filter – climate change.
There won’t be a single global currency, there will be dozens and dozens of “interoperable” digital currencies creating an “harmonious payment ecosystem”.
There won’t be a single global digital identity service, there will be a series of “interconnected identity networks” engaging in the “free flow of data to promote security”.
There won’t be a global government, there will be international panels of “impartial experts”, appointed by the UN who make “policy recommendations”.
Most or all of the countries of the world will follow most or all of the recommendations, but anyone who calls these panels global governments will be forwarded fact-checks from Snopes or Politifact highlighting that “UN expert panels do NOT constitute a global government because they have no legislative power”.
This, I suggest, is how global government will take shape in 2024 and beyond.
Compartmentalized, utterly deniable…but very, very real.
Smashing The A.I. Threat Matrix: How Humanity Defeats Skynet