WADE FRAZIER : A Healed Planet

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

While hiking with a friend yesterday, he expressed his shock when he recently went into Seattle, walked into the men’s restroom, and a woman walked in behind him to use the restroom. Apparently, even where they are not marked that way, the bathrooms are unisex. He discussed people who moved away from Seattle, who are shocked to hear what has happened to Seattle in recent years, as it decays into an urban hell.

He noted that the purpose of public officials is to ensure the wellbeing of the citizenry, and Washington and especially Seattle is failing on that. He mentioned how there are criminal rings with Internet forums, and how when Seattle decriminalized shoplifting of less than about $900, the crime rings rejoiced. The Seattle area has become a “criminal buffet.” So, the trans issue in Seattle is really symptomatic of Seattle’s decline, if a spectacular one. My wife went into Seattle last week, and expressed her disgust with the filthiness of the unisex bathroom that she used at a flagship Starbucks store, and she told an apologetic management about it, who felt overwhelmed by the situation.

Back to Doublethink.

Raymond is a lesbian who campaigns against prostitution and pornography, and devoted a section to the trans-porn industry. It is almost entirely comprised of “she-males” who have breasts and male genitalia. Most of the porn actors are from poor nations, and use the money to buy further trans treatments.” One commenter wrote that trans porn’s primary audience is “hetero trans fetishists. It sells precisely because it is trashy, objectifying, and offensive. They’re marketing trans people as a naughty taboo for bored straight people.” Trans porn is just another American import that is stained with pain and blood, in another experiment in depravity.

Raymond wrote: “While trans advocates deny that these ‘sissified’ men are part of the trans community, the overlap between the trans-identified and woman community and the ‘sissy’ community is evident on trans pornography sites.” Raymond wrote: “Those trans activists who are shouting the loudest are often the same ones who are pro-sex work and campaigners for decriminalization of prostitution. […] In a Slate article covering LGBTQ life, prostitution decriminalization is acknowledged as the centerpiece of trans rights.” Needless to say, there are no biological women in that milieu, but hypersexual men. A 2015 survey found that 19% of trans identified people and 47% of black trans-identified women have been or are sex workers.

Feminists fight against both prostitution and the trans industry. The UK Women’s Human Rights Campaign (now called Women’s Declaration International) has this platform:

“We re-affirm the sex-based rights of women and girls.

• We reaffirm motherhood as an exclusively female status.
• We reaffirm women's and girls rights to physical and reproductive integrity and oppose their exploitation through surrogacy and related practices.
• We reaffirm women's rights to freedom of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association, and political participation.
• We reaffirm women's rights to fair play in sports.
• We reaffirm the need to end violence against women and girls, and to protect rights of children.

“We oppose all forms of discrimination against women and girls that result from replacing ‘sex’ with ‘gender identity’ in law, policy, and social practice.”


It is nice to see the support for J.K. Rowling in those circles (see how that article “credits” postmodernism for the current insanity, and the neoliberal “solution” for poor women – “Sell your bodies!”).

The great irony of the entire trans phenomenon is that the goal of feminists, and really, anybody the least bit progressive, is to do away with stereotypes, whether it be around sex, race, etc. The trans craze is literally about altering people’s bodies to conform to stereotypes about sex. It is completely backwards from anything progressive, and has the “bonus” of sterilizing those who “go all the way.”

Raymond wrote about the Bruce Jenner issue. His gold medal in the 1976 Olympic decathlon coincided with my days in track, I competed in four of the decathlon events, and even competed in the first female decathlon competition held in the USA (a highly dubious distinction! ). So, I followed his life over the years. He was a handsome man, and did well on TV and in the media, raking it in as an athlete-celebrity. In the 1980s, he got cosmetic surgery, and I was shocked when I saw the results. My first impression was that he looked like a woman. Now, I know that that was no accident. When he finally came out as trans in 2015, he immediately posed for a magazine cover in glamor shots, conforming to the female stereotype. Raymond wrote:


“A basic tenet of feminism is that women shouldn’t be treated as sexual objects, but Jenner objectifies himself for the viewing public. Jenner’s rewarded experience as a cover girl epitomized an image of a woman that is alluring to men and reveals the man-made femininity and the hypersexualization of the trans movement. […] Jenner has helped to provide a template for the ideal trans feminine body that men who identify as women wish they could possess. Fetishizing women and our body parts objectifies women and serves as another prop for men’s sexual gratification and the dehumanizing of women.”


Raymond also wrote:


“Historically, women have lost control of our own bodies – from the violation of women’s reproductive rights to the inability to walk down public streets without being sexually harassed or assaulted. The right of sexual access to women’s bodies has historically been a shared male entitlement – droit du seigneur – to sex on demand of the patriarch. Male entitlement generates the deception that women consent to being violated, as is alleged of rape victims and women in prostitution.”


One of the craziest aspects of the trans craze is transing gays and lesbians, and it goes beyond that to transing the autistic. It is transing for everything. If a woman remains a lesbian, she is subjected to pressure to have sex with men who pretend they are women, with genitals intact. Those lesbians who refuse the hypersexualized advances of men are subjected to harassment and violence, and many lesbians are being raped this way. Any lesbian group that refuses membership of men who pretend to be women is attacked, and black lesbians have suffered the most of all. Pippa Fleming wrote: “Lesbians have a right to say no to the phallus, no matter how it is concealed or revealed.”

It is has gone so far off the deep end that it is surreal, but is normalized in our insane culture. Men’s pretending to be women is the same thing as whites’ pretending to be blacks (Rachel Dolezal), Indians, etc. It is called “cultural appropriation.”

In this trans craze, it is women who speak out against it who are attacked, not men, and Raymond had a chapter on it. All of the strange vocabulary (front-holes, cis-women, egg-producers, TERF) is rarely used to describe men, but women, and often in degrading fashion. There are no women trying to invade men’s locker rooms and the like. The trans craze is primarily male-driven for male benefit. Women who declare as men are largely invisible, and the only exception that I know of is Ellen (now Elliot) Page. Raymond wrote: “So even when women become ‘trans men,’ […] women everywhere are second-class.”

Raymond often wrote about the crazy linguistic gyrations of the trans craze, such as when a Democratic candidate for president said, “Men can get pregnant too.” There is literally an incipient effort to transplant women’s wombs into men, so that they can get pregnant. That is probably the final frontier of this issue. Really, it is hard to believe as I write this. I remember talking with a childhood friend about whether anything is truly impossible, and one of us came up with men’s getting pregnant. We were not imaginative enough!

The New York Times is part of the hysteria, with a 12-page fashion article on “new options in trans underwear.” It is basically about tucking the penis, as most men who trans keep their genitals (they even call them “lady sticks”).

Of course, all of this insanity is a bonanza for the medical racket, as new markets open up.

Very similarly to the vaccination racket, the trans craze is getting entrenched by increasingly powerful players, and will not go quietly. The lawsuits by children who were transed likely comprise the best chance to change the tide. Tavistock lost a landmark lawsuit and closed its clinic. Reading the litigant’s story is informative.

Raymond wrote:


“Self-declared men (women) say its infuriating to discover the jealousy of self-declared women (men) to lust after women’s body parts such as breasts and wombs, and who constantly seek affirmation as women by eliciting assurances that they meet shallow standards of feminine clothing and makeup, and who don’t view women as whole persons.”


Like men, so-called trans-women can be very violent, as feminists and lesbians have learned the hard way. To them, it is just more male violence directed at women, even if they have swollen breasts from hormone treatments.

As with the COVID issue, what has been particularly disheartening for feminists and lesbians is that so-called “left” men are silent in the face of what is happening, and Raymond calls them “cowardly.” So, feminists make bizarre alliances with conservatives, because the so-called left has abandoned them.

The social media’s double-standards on the COVID issue are historic, as the Orwellian system took its mask off for all who have eyes to see. Any dissent is censored, even coming from Nobel laureates, and the public is treated to a barrage of propaganda from the likes of Fauci and Gates. One morning last week, I saw two interviews of Gates on Yahoo!’s front page, as he prepares the public for the next “pandemic” and promoted Frankenfoods (patented and lucrative, of course) as the future of food.

Raymond had a section on how incitements to violence by trans activists against feminists and other dissenters is actually protected speech in the social media (Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube in particular), and any dissent is called “hate speech” and censored, as reality once again has been turned upside down. Oh, if Orwell was alive to see it. Raymond sampled some of the Tweets on the issue:


“All TERFs deserve to be shot in the head.”

“pop quiz: if you kill a TERF, is it a crime? Answer: it is not. They are not considered lifeforms.

“I wanna direct a snuff film where multiple TERFs get shot in the head but don’t die, they just suffer in agony.”

“I want to set every single TERF kid on fire.”


Can anybody imagine a woman writing something like that? But that is the protected speech of men who pretend they are women. While those social media companies actively protect such speech, they instantly cancel the accounts of those who dissent or point out that the above are actually incitements to violence, which is the classic instance when censorship is deemed appropriate.

Raymond wrote that actually naming the behavior of those men pretending to be women as violence and sexual assault, which would be uncontroversial if straight men did it to women, is a taboo subject in the trans milieu. There is a book titled You Told Me You Were Different that chronicles those criminal acts inflicted by men who pretend that they are women. It is like predatory men just found a new, protected venue to continue their crimes, kind of like the best “profession” for child molesters is to become foster parents. Raymond wrote that the “I am different” salesmanship of men who go trans gulls women just like such men did in the 1960s, as sensitive flower children, when it was just a way to dodge the draft and get laid, as they raped women at Woodstock. Never underestimate what men will do to get laid.

As I have written, the war on women is being waged from both the right and left today, with banning abortion coming from the right, and support for the trans craze coming from the left.

Trans activists have arrived at women’s events and advocated violence against them, including at rape shelters where men demand admittance. Back in 2013 women were noting the assaults on women coming from both the right and left, such as:


“What’s most disturbing is the public response. Men who have assaulted women are held up as heroes; the angry mood is celebrated. There is a war on women on the left as well as the right. If you don’t believe us, speak up and see for yourself.”


Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

The trans movement to put men in women’s prisons is more of the same. A UK report in 2017 showed that half of all “trans” men in UK prisons were sex offenders, the same ratio as for the other men in prison. In the USA, laws have been passed in states to put men into prisons with women, where they rape them. In my home state of Washington, the ACLU actually sued a private citizen and the media for trying to get access to prison records to get the number of men in women’s prisons. The ACLU lost its way long ago, similar to how “human rights” organizations have become imperial tools (1, 2, 3, 4). The woman whom the ACLU sued asked to not be publicly named, for personal safety reasons, but the ACLU named her anyway. An irony of the ACLU’s lawsuit is that the woman being sued made her document request to Washington State by using the resources on the ACLU’s website.

California, which went off the deep end long ago, actually expects women inmates to be raped by the “trans-women” placed with them, as California began issuing contraception resources to the women prisoners. As an example of how insane California is, all men who request a transfer top women’s prisons are required to take a course to deal with their fears about living with women. Raymond remarked: “There are some ideas so absurd and dangerous that only male bureaucrats could conceive them.”

One California woman inmate said:


“When we reach out for help we get nothing. […] There has been an assault on a woman and we still are silenced. [..] Does anyone care that we are being forced to house with 6’2” 250+ lbs men with penises that are here for brutally raping women. […] If we say we are in fear, we are the ones locked up.”


As Chris Hedges wrote on the insanity: “Men who identify as women rape women with their penises, and these crimes are being recorded as committed by women.”

In 2017, a “trans” man punched a 60-year-old feminist in the face in London. The man earlier wrote about wanting to “f**k up some feminists,” and he defended himself at his trial by stating that “acts of physical violence against those who are systematically violent are self-defense.” Some feminists and leftist groups actually protested on behalf of that man, calling him the real victim. One Scottish trans group Tweeted about the assault: “Punching TERFs is the same as punching Nazis. Fascism must be smashed with the greatest violence to unsure our collective liberation from it.”

In 2019, a journalist spoke at Edinburg University about male violence, when a “trans“ man attempted to punch her, while screaming that she was a “Nazi and TERF scum.” The man wore a skirt and had heavy stubble, like some transvestite truck driver parody. Raymond wrote: “Attacks are nothing new for radical feminists who clearly acknowledge that men are not women. […] Radical feminists remain the primary targets of trans activists.” The media rushed to defend the 2019 attack, which led to journalist Dan Fisher’s writnig: “Open letter to the British Media: You are Complicit in Male violence against Women.”

Raymond noted other attacks on feminists around the world, and wrote:


“It seems that the mere claim of men who self-declare as women is sufficient to convince many that males who appropriate a female gender identity are indeed women. Years of living as men with male privilege, and indulging in toxic masculinity, do not disappear with a man’s self-declaration as female.

“When we examine how self-declared women (men) behave towards natal women who challenge their right to usurp a woman’s identity, it is clear that such men are indulging in the privileged behavior that we recognize as male entitlement. The most telling proof that self-declared women are still men is their misogynist conduct.”


Raymond had a chapter on men’s invasion of women’s sports, and finally becoming sports stars. It is obviously wrecking women’s sports. Raymond wrote on the natural physical advantages that men have over women in speed and strength, and how hormone treatments don’t mitigate them very well. The truly insane aspect of it is that actual women have been denied Olympic competitions because their testosterone levels were naturally too high, but they were half of the levels found acceptable for men who masquerade as women to compete as women. Even Bruce (Caitlyn) Jenner is against boys’ competing as girls.

Raymond sadly noted the legal battles over men in women’s sports, in which conservative states are outlawing it, while so-called progressive states protect the “rights” of those boys to compete as girls. Raymond presented several examples of this, and one was the story of Linnea Saltz, a record-setting middle-distance runner, who found herself competing against a man whose best marks beat hers by ten seconds in the 800 meters, which is a huge margin for such an event.

Raymond listed some of the absurdities of men in women’s sports, and one was when a 50-year-old man (6’8” and 230 pounds) led his college to the national championship, as he was a rebound machine. When I read that, it reminded me of an analogy that I thought of long ago. Imagine if Shaquille O’Neal suddenly declared himself a women and joined the WNBA, wearing pigtails as he lumbered up and down the court, and got 50 rebounds a game, at age 50. It would make a mockery of the WNBA. Men who compete as women are already making a mockery of swimming, boxing, and other sports. Joe Biden and the federal government are actually encouraging it, and the media has been enabling it.

Selina Soule was a star runner in Connecticut, until boys began competing as girls. Soule’s mother said:


“Boys with mediocre times can compete in the boys’ category and the completely dominate girls’ events just a few weeks later. I’ve already seen this happen in Connecticut. After a series of unremarkable finishes as a boy in the 2018 indoor season, the same athlete began competing - and winning – as a girl in the outdoor season that started just a few weeks later.”


One of the darkest aspects of the trans craze is that children are being treated with hormones at school without their parents’ knowledge or consent. The government literally looks at parents trying to protect their children as the enemy of trans ideology. The ACLU is actually leading the charge on this.

Raymond wrote about the shotgun marriage of LGB with T, and how gay children are being led down the trans path. At Tavistock, they joked that “there were no gay people left.”

This trans insanity is particularly prominent in the governments of English-speaking nations, such as the UK, USA, and New Zealand. Some of the tactics reminded Raymond of the Stalinist Soviet Union or Maoist China, as dissenters are sent off for “reeducation.”

Raymond wrote about it:


“Like the Tavistock clinicians who dissented from the gender identity program at the clinic and subsequently resigned, one dissenter said: ‘it felt as if we were part of something that people would look back on in the future, and ask, what were we thinking?’”


The UK seems to be recovering its sanity a little, and Sweden banned puberty blockers in 2021, but the USA and New Zealand show no sign of improvement.

This ends my summary of Raymond’s important book. I’ll make one more post, on my views on the issue, and then I’ll try to leave the trans issue alone for now, until the next surreal event in the milieu.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I’ll try to wrap up the trans issue for now.

My general take on all of this is two-fold:

• Becoming a sentient species is not easy;
• Transitioning between Epochs is not easy.

Females up the human evolutionary line have not had it “easy,” in relation to males, since monkeys. I am currently reading books on the evolution of monogamy in the human line, and will have more to say later, but women have had a particularly rough ride over the human journey. Matrilocal horticultural and fishing villages were as good as it got for women until the Fourth Epoch. As Riane Eisler and others have argued, two powers have been worshipped throughout the human journey: the power to make life, and to take it. What I think is very clear with many men who pretend to be women is their outright jealously and covetousness of a woman’s ability to bring forth life, and how they are losing control of it.  As I write this, an American Senator (a man, of course), recently proposed a law to ban abortions nationally, after his double-talk this summer.

In the agrarian (Third) Epoch, particularly with the rise of civilization, women experienced a decline in status that did not begin to reverse until the Fourth (Industrial) Epoch. IMO, the trans craze cannot truly be understood until those dynamics are appreciated. There is a great deal of “cultural momentum” to try to reverse the improvements in female status that have happened. The Red States have one foot in the Third Epoch, and their efforts to ban all abortions are best seen, IMO, in the light of making women chattel of men again. The Blue States and their support of the trans craze are best seen, IMO, as an attempt to do away with women altogether, as a rearguard action to completely undermine women. American women don’t have it easy anywhere.

To go back to the science of it, males and females cannot change their sexes, as it is determined at conception. The concept of “gender” is about sex roles or sex stereotypes. By all means, sex stereotypes deserve to go into history’s dustbin, and in the Fifth Epoch, they will. In the Fourth, they are under siege, and the trans craze can be seen as another attempt to reinforce the stereotypes. The only other credible explanation that I see for people’s wanting to become the other sex is a mystical one, when souls have difficulty changing sexes for their physical lifetimes. But people who deny their sex and mutilate their bodies to ape the other sex are mentally ill and are likely dealing with some heavy personal karma. They need help, and drugging them and mutilating their bodies is not the answer.

Men are naturally hypersexual, while women are not, which reflects the relative costs of reproduction. Men who trans are usually hypersexual, and women who trans are largely asexual. That is no different from how homosexual men are usually hypersexual, while lesbians are looking more for an emotional connection. I have been familiar with the gay scene for most of my adult life. I heard wild tales from San Francisco about the time that Foucault was diving into its gay S&M scene, which cost him his life. The evidence is strong that AIDS came from drug use, not the HIV virus, but huge economic and political interests enforce the dogma, and anything that challenges it is censored, just like how trans dissent is censored today.

After my Rip Van Winkle experience in a Seattle restaurant, I sought to understand what I was seeing. I studied identity politics and found its roots in postmodernism and its variants, which Foucault had plenty to do with. This book, Cynical Theories, showed how the trans craze clearly has its roots in identity politics.

When Matt Taibbi published his interview with the author of The Abolition of Sex, I read it, and read three more trans books this summer:

• Transing our Children;
• Irreversible Damage;
• Doublethink.

It is not like I sought out women who critiqued the trans craze, but it looks like only women are, which is very telling. I have written about Transing Our Children, Irreversible Damage, and Doublethink at length, so there is no need to recapitulate them again, and what painful reads they were. Transing children is evil, and was the hardest part for me to deal with. As with childhood vaccination, as the medical racket prevailed once again, transing children is another huge windfall for Big Pharma, and I think that that explains most of the politics around it. Money always talks loudly in the USA.

When I see outrageous cultural train wrecks like the trans craze, it only fans the fire under me to get my work done and help the Fifth Epoch come to pass. Until we permanently banish scarcity and fear from our societies (and only one thing can do that), horrific situations like the trans craze will continue to appear.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

It is time for a pandemic post. In Manufacturing Consent, Ed and Noam wrote about the media’s “experts” who parrot the propaganda line, who always had prodigious and usually hidden conflicts of interest. That dynamic has been dramatically evident in this “pandemic” from the beginning, with those bogus papers that dismissed the lab-leak hypothesis. Fauci was in it up to his eyeballs. But, it is like Napoleon said: “It is not necessary to bury the truth. It is sufficient merely to delay it until nobody cares.”

Back when the “pandemic” began, I started to see “fact-checking” sites pop up all over the Internet. If I googled an alternative site, literally the first result was not the site, but a Google fact-check report on the site that I sought. I read the first one of those reports, and instantly realized that it was propaganda, not anything like real fact-checking. As far as I have seen, there is not one reliable “fact-checking” site on the Internet, particularly those promoted by Google, Facebook, and the media. It is all thinly disguised propaganda, as those fact-checkers pretend that they are impartial arbiters of the truth. Maybe somebody can show me a credible fact-checking site that is above the fray.

I read this article this morning, on one of the “fact-checking” debunkers of the lab-leak hypothesis, Danielle Anderson. The “impartial” fact-checker actually did gain-of-function research and worked for a Chinese scientist with ties to the Wuhan lab. As far as I am concerned, what Anderson did is criminal, but she will never face the music, because if you lie on behalf of the Establishment, all is well. You get promoted, not prosecuted. Kirsch also writes plenty about the fraudulent COVID “fact-checking.”

Paul Offit has astounding conflicts of interest (he voted himself rich), and has been the biggest public cheerleader of vaccines in the USA, along with Peter Hotez. But Offit has been increasingly alarmed by the corruption around the COVID vaccines, and I just read this almost gleeful article by Kirsch, which counts Offit among the “anti-vaxxers” today. If Offit is now in the ranks of the anti-vaxxers, who can honestly be pro-vax, particularly around the mRNA vaccines? An attached Mercola article covers those untested vaccines that concern Offit so much. Another attached Mercola article is about how the authorities are now admitting to many lies that they told during the “pandemic.” Another attached Mercola article is about plummeting America life expectancy, for a dose of reality about what is really happening.

Here is a Mercola review of a new book that calls the Medical-Industrial Complex a criminal enterprise. There is now a global effort by medical doctors and scientists to halt the COVID vaccines. Here is a typical story from the vaccine-injured. Dying from heart inflammation is just one of many ways that people are dying from the COVID vaccines. The Israeli safety data scandal is almost funny, and the CDC’s head is in the sand, as usual (not everybody’s is), when they are not lying outright. A CDC insider thinks that the CDC’s problem is one of groupthink, as everybody guzzles the Kool-Aid. A new Canadian report states that the vaccines are worthless for those under 60, and the vaccines have many technical defects.

Jared Kushner bragged in his new book on how he helped ram through ventilators for COVID patients, which usually killed them. This is so typical of how the system works, and only later do we get the insight into how incompetent and corrupt it all was, and we are still only seeing the tip of the iceberg. A lawsuit has exposed coordinated Tech/Government censorship of all COVID speech that contradicts the propaganda. It is Orwell for the 21^st century. The American totalitarian police state is here, and doctors who speak out have their careers ruined by a shadowy organization. The UK is no longer vaccinating children, for a glimpse of sanity.

Attached is a Mercola article on how the FDA is going transhumanist, as it sells the programming of our immune systems.

This is now being called “Fauci’s Pandemic.” As if I need to, I am reading this book on vaccination, and will report on it one day. Biden declared the pandemic over, but people are still being fired for refusing vaccination. However, companies are quietly rolling back the vaccine mandates.

That is enough for now.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

In the last year of Ed’s life, his only writing topics were how the Propaganda Model fared, thirty years later, and the anti-Russian hysteria that the media was whipping up. Of particular note was the PropOrNot smear campaign that Washington Post promoted, which was an outright attack on the alternative media, which turned out to be a Ukrainian operation, with CIA help. So, Ukrainian propaganda in the American media goes back to 2016, which Big Tech used to wipe out alternative media venues.

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainian propaganda has been dialed up to 11. On Yahoo! are regular articles by “The New Voice of Ukraine.” To actually use “voice” in the name reflects the heavy-handedness of the propaganda, like the CIA’s Voice of America. To even use “Voice of Ukraine” makes it seem like a parody, and reading one of its articles was enough. It is pure war propaganda that the American media promotes.

So, where can you get information on Ukraine that is the least bit accurate? It is not easy. Consortium News is my best source. Scott Ritter was a Soviet warfare expert, so I read his Ukrainian writings with interest (here is today’s offering). I also read pro-Russian sites such as these (1, 2), and an article I recently read is the subject of this post. (It was at this point in my writing that Putin’s speech was published - another step in our waltz to Armageddon).

The article was this one, and I am going to attach the related graphic, as it aligns with my work, although it is a saltier version of it, as the article also is. On the left side are the people I seek, in green. That overlap where the red and green meet is not quite what I have in mind, although those there can certainly do work and become choir-worthy. They are what I call the awakening, and awakening can only come through experience, not reading work such as mine. My work can help the awakening and the awake. I don’t know anybody who was born awake. If there are any, that is wonderful. My experience, and those in my pantheon, is that awakening comes from living on Earth, for those whose hearts are whole. As Michael stated, few souls ever wake up while on Earth, as they choose to grow through pain. I am trying to help manifest an alternative to that.

The parade of sleeping victims of the medical racket I have called The March of the Lemmings, and it is the big red circle in the middle of that diagram. They are the sleeping, the slaughtered, and those on the right side of the circle are dark pathers (AKA psychopaths, self-servers, etc.).

Many different schools of thought end up in the same general vicinity, similar to the diverse ways that my fellow travelers eventually came to the free energy issue.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I was not going to mention it, but it is making headlines (1, 2), so I’ll write something about it. The basics of Global Warming are fairly easy to understand, far easier than understanding how cells work, for instance. In my home state, we are setting new temperature records every year, as the glaciers rapidly melt.

Right-wingers have made careers out of denying Global Warming and the resultant climate change. They are nearly invariably scientifically illiterate. Take William Engdahl, for instance. He argued that because carbon dioxide molecules are heavier than oxygen and nitrogen molecules, that they do not rise into the atmosphere, so therefore carbon dioxide is not really a greenhouse gas. Gases don’t work that way in our dynamic atmosphere, and mix evenly. At ground-level, where carbon dioxide emissions come from, the PPM concentration is higher than it is at 3,000 feet of elevation (but by less than 3%), for instance, but it is constant after that, and even rises a little. What Engdahl and others like him do is conflate the problem with elite-proposed “solutions,” to deny it all, with their heads firmly planted in the sand.

The great irony of their stance, as they pillory the Rockefellers, Bill Gates, and the like, is that they are parroting the disinformation of oil company shills such as Fred Singer, who made a career out of denying Global Warming and other harm that corporations inflict on the world. Singer and a compliant, pro-corporate media created the illusion of debate and uncertainty among climate scientists, where no debate really existed. Their only debate was how fast Earth would warm, and on that score, we have seen that they were always too conservative, not “alarmist,” as the deniers claim. Every time that I see a new study of Antarctica or Greenland, it turned out that the ice was melting far faster than the models predicted.

I wholeheartedly agree that the “solutions” coming from the elite are no solution at all, and what comes from the world’s governments, think tanks, and the like are worthless and serve nefarious elite agendas. I know that the solution to Global Warming and all of the biggest human problems is older than I am, but is kept sequestered from human awareness and use for reasons of global power. The so-called “sheeple” will never awaken to the reality, until it is delivered into their lives, and that is normal.

It does no good to judge the situation; it is just what it is. Most souls just muddle through, getting a “C” in the end, and never awaken while in physical reality. I guess that we could take that up with God, on why such souls are created, instead of all “A” students. I don’t know the answer, but I just know that nearly everybody on Earth is asleep, and will fiercely defend their slumbers, no matter how painful they may be. And here I am, living amongst them, which is one of the loneliest feelings. I don’t wish that I had taken the blue pill, but those who took the red pill are very few and far between on Earth today, and only they can make a dent. Time is short.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As a brief addendum to this morning’s post, not only is Engdahl a Global Warming denier, but he is onboard with the abiotic oil hypothesis. The abiotic oil hypothesis states that hydrocarbons are primordial and part of Earth’s formation, so that there is virtually unlimited oil for us to drill, if we only go deeply enough. I have had to spend a lot of time over the years studying the abiotic oil hypothesis, and my studies of the journey of life on Earth settled those issues for me. I have seen right-wingers also invoke abiotic processes for the coal deposits. Denying global warming and embracing the abiotic oil hypothesis has the charm of concluding that we can burn hydrocarbons forever and suffer no consequences for it. It is a highly egocentric and deluded stance, but common among right-wingers, as they cherry pick what aligns with their delusions.

Briefly, our oil deposits were created by anoxic (oxygenless) events, mainly along the shores of the Tethys Ocean. The coal was nearly all formed more than 300 million years ago, from similarly anoxic conditions. The fungus hypothesis for coal formation, or the lack thereof, may be incorrect, and my essay update will include an expanded discussion. We are burning up the hydrocarbon deposits a million times faster than they were created, which is a little short of sustainable.

Will we be “saved” by running out of hydrocarbons and having a famine-induced population collapse, rather than have a collapse through nuclear wars, as we fight over the dwindling hydrocarbons. How about none of the above?

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

When I was poking around on abiotic oil this morning, I found myself on Rational Wiki, which I found to be a propaganda site for “skeptics” long ago. I decided to see if they had a page on Dennis, and I was not disappointed. I have dealt with the lying skeptics for many years, and consider organized skepticism to be a criminal enterprise.

So, the Rational Wiki site’s article on Dennis was no surprise, but it was the first time that I saw something on the most recent attacks on Dennis’s efforts. I don’t want to spend too much time on Rational Wiki’s page on Dennis, but I have a few points to make:

• All of the Sturm und Drang in New Jersey in the 1970s resulted in a plea bargain that Dennis was rooked into, in his young and naïve days, to his lasting regret;
• There is literally no mention made of Dennis’s heat pump, which is still the best heating system that has ever been on the world market;
• There is no mention of how Dennis put his heat pump on his customers’ homes for free, which is the most ingenious and benevolent business strategy that I ever saw or heard of, which very few understood;
• It soft-pedaled the Washington experience, which stands to this day as the greatest attempt ever made to bring alternative energy technology to the marketplace, and good old Betsy made that “accusation” that Rational Wiki cited;
• Its “Pleaded guilty to two felony counts of consumer fraud in California in 1990” is the standard disinformation rendering of the Ventura ordeal; Dennis pled guilty to not filing a form, after the judge took his attorney hostage;
• It predictably lauded Mr. Skeptic’s criminal behavior.

The only thing new to me was the SEC’s attack on Dennis’s most recent effort (1, 2), and that is what I really want to comment on. I learned my journey’s greatest lesson during my first stint with Dennis, and had strong doubts that the businessman’s approach would work. After my second stint with Dennis, I was certain of it. But the businessman’s approach is all that Dennis knows, as he doggedly keeps at it. I really have not been very interested in Dennis’s efforts since the Ventura days. I understand Dennis’s approach probably better than anybody, which was why Dennis would keep running his ideas by me.

Dennis would design win-win-win programs with his financial engineering, but not really. The authors of the feast would ultimately be the rackets, and they don’t play fair. The ultimate payers of his energy programs would be the energy companies, and in his latest effort, it looks like he was exploiting a crack in the medical racket. IMO, about 80% of the medical racket does not deserve to exist, just like the energy racket, and improving the health of Americans would be something that I could get behind, but that was not what Dennis was doing, if I read the charges accurately. It was a pure financial engineering play.

The part about his changing his name might have some truth about it, but Dennis wanted to change his name to Josiah David in the 1970s (Alison did, which is how she became Alison David) for religious reasons, and it looks like he did in 2015, but I doubt that I will ever call him Josiah.

Rational Wiki linked to this page by Dennis, and I have no issue at all with that was written there (that is the Dennis I know), but the businessman’s approach for this stuff won’t work. The business world is rigged, in ways that most people cannot even imagine. It is high time for a different approach.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

From today’s post on Dennis, I found myself traveling down memory lane a little, and found that Mr. Skeptic’s site seems to have been largely preserved, here. So, I added a link to his crackpot page from my “skeptics” essay. I am kind of pleased that it survived, and saved the pertinent parts of it. Once Dennis was run out of the energy industry, Mr. Skeptic quietly folded his tents. I am more than half convinced that he was being compensated for his vendetta against Dennis, which lasted for more than a decade.

I read those pages of Mr. Skeptic’s back in the 1990s. I don’t want to spend much time on Mr. Skeptic, but I want to comment a little on this page of his, which I have done before. That first part by “Charlie” was by somebody that worked with Dennis for a year or so. When I see accounts like that, it reminds me that we all have baggage and see events differently. There is some truth to his account, but it is also more like a caricature of Dennis, a kind of uncharitable impressionistic image by somebody with a thin understanding of the issues and an ax to grind.

The next section was by a man who concluded that Dennis was a “singularly dangerous individual,” but had no idea what he was witnessing when Bill the BPA Hit Man disrupted Dennis’s presentation. The event sailed miles over that man’s head.

I have done it before, maybe at Avalon, but below that ignorant account of Dennis’s encounter with Bill is Charlie’s account of “The Shaft.” Somebody exaggerated there, and I don’t know if it was Charlie or Dennis, but I was there for that event, and we paid that con man either $700 or $1,400, not $20,000. He has it right how Dennis always thought that the entire situation was hilarious, even while it was happening. When we got a gel cell battery for our money, Dennis did laugh at it. In Charlie’s original account at the top of that page, he stated that Dennis paid Searle $10K per month. I was there and saw the money go in and out, and it was maybe $200 a month for a few months. So, I wonder about Charlie.

I have written that some years ago, I contacted several people whom I saw acquit themselves honorably during my days with Dennis, and not one of them wanted to interact with me. To them, the entire affair was a failed business opportunity. If they saw it that way, imagine how the others saw it.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

For the people I seek, all of my writings and posts are relevant, even the hiking ones. I have made it as personal as I can, to help overcome the limitations of this medium. As hard as my journey can be to believe, my public version of it is very watered down. As unbelievable as my journey can be, Dennis’s is far more unbelievable. Brian’s being asked/ordered to go to Mars is merely an amusing footnote to our adventures.

My posts on Dennis and the “skeptics” in the past day highlight a key quality that people need to be choir-worthy, which is a keen sense of discernment. It is a minefield out there, and I encourage people to go down the rabbit holes on a few controversial issues, to help hone their tools of discernment. The people I seek need to be scientifically literate, which takes work to do. Reading scientific papers on controversial issues is good work, to see how the game is played. There are many scientific topics that I stay abreast of, partly because they are relevant to my work, but also because they are fascinating.

If people do their homework, it quickly becomes evident that sites such as Rational Wiki and Mr. Skeptic’s site are irrational and even dishonest, as they claim to speak for rationality, oh, the Orwellian irony of it all. The corruption of medical science is something to behold. Kennedy wrote the book on medical racket, 2.0, and every day, I see something on that corruption. All branches of science, to one degree or another, have been corrupted, but all fields are that way. The pure faith is not practiced in any field of endeavor, in our world of scarcity and fear, but that does not mean that we can afford to be ignorant of them.

Ed and Noam’s Propaganda Model has never been credibly challenged, but Wikipedia libels Ed, instead. It is easy to smear a dead man, and if Ed is smeared like that, Dennis is a particularly easy target.

For people who care and are awake, that kind of study helps develop comprehensive perspectives. My work is far from the only way to develop a comprehensive perspective, but the people I seek need to have familiarity with the subject matter that I cover. Nearly 30 years ago, I planned to write a book, but gave up the idea in 2001. But it has risen again, as I realized that I can’t expect the people I seek to all engage in several years of study, and a book should help not only attract the people I seek, but it might shorten their learning curves a little.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I want to present an example of those rabbit holes that beckon. I have been doing a lot of study on what will become my new essay, which I keep not getting enough writing done on. I have written a bit on Homo erectus and the abilities they had. A lot of key human innovation seems to have happened between 2.0 and 1.5 million years ago. If the control of fire, language, craftsmanship, and so on happened then, just when what we undoubtedly call humans appeared on the evolutionary scene, might the nuclear family have appeared then? As I poked into it, I got Sex at Dawn and Sex at Dusk. The author of Sex at Dusk accuses the authors of Sex at Dawn of misogyny, and the author of this paper accuses the author of Sex at Dusk of misogyny.

I was reading those as I finished up my transsexual studies, and the trans craze is also called misogynist by feminists. And this is in the middle of an effort to ban virtually all abortions in the USA. That is a lot of misogyny flying around. So, I have been going down quite a rabbit hole on sexual politics, and I need to come up for air. This is getting to be too much. And, so far, I am no closer to the idea of when humans may have become monogamous. Some argue that it didn’t happen until agriculture, while others argue that it happened at least a million years ago.

We’ll see what I eventually write about it, but I want to state this: monogamy has always primarily been an economic institution, just like polygyny and other mating arrangements. When studying the various perspectives on the issue, it always came down to the welfare of women, men, and the offspring. Whatever form of family prevailed always had a primarily economic underlying basis, which always has primarily relied on the energy issue, and for nearly the entire human journey, that meant food.

In the Fifth Epoch, women will not be economically dependent on men to help raise children, and I expect that something far more enlightened than the nuclear family will appear. Exactly what that is, I don’t know, but there will not be unwanted children, women will have full control of their bodies, etc. From where we stand today, that might all seem like fantasy, but every new Epoch would have been unimaginable to those living in the prior Epoch.

So, I’ll try to climb out of that rabbit hole for now. It has been educational, but I could also spend two years plumbing those depths, and I need to get my work done. I think that it is pretty safe to say that some form of monogamy was prevalent with hunter-gatherers, but exactly when it began is a source of enduring controversy. It would not surprise me if the concept of paternity was understood for the first time by Homo erectus, and that had something to do with the arrival of nuclear families. But that is a long way from being established, although there is evidence for it.

But all such work of mine is really about what the Fifth Epoch may look like. I think it is easy to see that the nuclear family will become economically obsolete, and today’s humans are regularly unfaithful to their mates, as they have always been. The general theme is that everybody wants their mates to be faithful, but they want sexual opportunities for themselves. That should not be surprising. We can call that hypocrisy.

Monogamy has generally meant that more care has been given to children by the fathers, and there were benefits to women and men (as well as costs), so it has kind of worked out. But I think that in an Epoch of abundance, little of today’s social organization will survive, including mating arrangements. All children will be raised in an atmosphere of abundance, love, and safety, however.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

It is time for a medical racket post. In ways, there is nothing new to report, as it has worked this way for longer than I have been alive. Big Pharma has its roots in the Civil War, and diversifying robber barons captured medicine more than a century ago. And orthodox medicine wanted to be caught, in a mutually advantageous arrangement, and the only losers were members of the public (and the real healers), but they have always been expendable.

The improvements in health and life expectancy in the past two centuries have almost nothing to do with medical interventions, but with improvements in sanitation, hygiene, and nutrition, which are side-effects of the Industrial Revolution. The conquest of infectious disease, that killer of children, was the biggest victory by far, and it had nothing to do with vaccines and antibiotics. The idea that vaccines are some kind of health savior has as much truth to it as the fables of George Washington’s honesty do.

While getting food that was not rotting was a big part of the nutritional improvement, and getting enough calories, processed food is deadly, and where the “diseases of civilization” come from, but it generally shows up later in life (other than tooth decay, shrinking dental arches, and other developmental problems), as it prematurely ages people. Western diets are a long, long way from what chimps eat, which is mostly fruit. All processed food is “junk food,” to one degree or another, and that is what causes nearly all Western health problems. It causes metabolic disease, and that is what kills most Westerners. All that drugs do is mask the symptoms. Western medicine is full of worthless, deadly, but lucrative interventions.

When the New York Times recently smeared Mercola with a “documentary,” Mercola remarked on the irony of that show. They never scored a hit on Mercola, but while the documentary aired, the commercials were all for junk food and drugs to mask the symptoms of eating junk food! Today, 75% of advertising money on TV comes from Big Pharma. It is Ed and Noam’s advertising filter taken to surreal extremes.

Processed food is addictive, and frankly, most Westerners are happily addicted, in their obese state, and have no interest in changing. So, they get those worthless drugs, surgeries, and other interventions, and the cash registers sing. The lemmings stampede to their doom, because almost nobody ever wants to wake up. I was surprised when I was twelve, but I now know it was my earliest awakening experience. As I always say about these situations, it is 1% conspiracy and 99% complicity. It is very clear in the medical racket how virtually everybody plays along.

The other day, I was watching this interview with Paul Marik, on what is happening with the COVID vaccines. He said that about 70-80% of doctors guzzle the Kool-Aid and believe the vaccine propaganda. About 20-30% suspect that something is awry, and only heroes like him dare to speak up, and their careers end when they do. Back in 1991, I heard Peter Moscow talk about the fear of doctors of failing to toe the line, as the medical inquisitions will come after them.

Marik discussed the Kangaroo Court tribunal that ended his career. They can literally make it up as they go, with fictitious patients and the like, which was a trip down memory lane for me.

I have long written that medical science has long been considered the flimsiest and most corrupt branch of science, and this article provides contemporary examples of it. If you watch Marik’s interview, he makes the same charges that Kennedy did in his magnum opus, which I consider the chronicle of medical racket, 2.0. Western medicine is fraudulent, from top to bottom. I don’t let them get their hands on me.

I could write for days on this, and the “pandemic,” but I saw something yesterday that was almost amusing, in a macabre way. A Canadian woman died literally seven minutes after getting her COVID booster, and the medical authorities immediately announced that she died of “natural causes.” It makes me wonder what it would take for the authorities to suspect that the vaccine might have been the cause. The patient’s arm fell off within ten seconds? His/her head exploded? The evidence of harm is spectacular, and always covered up. We left sanity behind long ago on this issue. Kirsch’s latest estimate is that the COVID vaccines have killed 600,000-to-750,000 Americans, and it takes about five months to kill the patients.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I just received my copy of the latest reprint of Gary’s book. It is in hardback, and is by far the greatest quality of any printing of his book. This copy will outlive me. I wrote about it just now in a forum that I was chased out of years ago.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Here is Sam Husseini’s latest, on how Congress never investigated the anthrax letters it was sent in 2001, mere days after 9/11. This is a near-and-dear subject for me. A chapter in Kennedy’s book dealt with the anthrax attack’s impact on the burgeoning biosecurity industry. Although Congress did not investigate, the FBI did, and concluded that the anthrax came from an American military lab, and attributed it to a Fort Detrick scientist who immediately “committed suicide.” Case closed. Obama threatened to veto any investigation into it.

As I well know, the Warren Commission was a sham from the outset (as all such official investigations are). Some 9/11 commissioners publicly stated that the commission’s investigators, including the FBI, lied to them. That 9/11 and the anthrax letters happened a week apart can only strengthen the idea that 9/11 was at least partly an inside job, and the anthrax letters were the coup de grâce that got the Nazi-like Patriot Act passed. Conspiracists can be forgiven for thinking that they were all related. They probably were, and in ways that will never be revealed publicly, just like with the JFK hit.

Sam’s article mentions Robert Kadlec, and Kennedy’s book goes into depth on Kadlec, who “coincidentally” led the charge with Fauci to cover-up the lab-origin scenario of COVID, which Sam has been writing on since 2020. This is a timely article from Sam, and much appreciated.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I read Unreliable Sources before I read Manufacturing Consent, and I would recommend Unreliable Sources as a better introduction than Manufacturing Consent. Ed and Noam’s book is very scholarly, while Unreliable Sources is designed more for beginners on how the capitalist media works. That tobacco section in Ed’s bio was partly derived from Unreliable Sources, which was where I first read on the stark difference in American media coverage regarding airliners’ being shot down, depending on who shot them down. While writing Ed’s bio, I learned that he performed a very thorough assessment of airliner attacks, maybe the first one, as the first case study of what became the Propaganda Model.

Of course, I had my awakening on the media long before I heard of Noam and Ed, which made me so ready to learn at their scholarly feet. Those experiences and studies were invaluable in helping me recognize American propaganda. Much is very blatant, but a lot can be pretty subtle, until one develops a trained eye. For instance, since yesterday, it has been interesting and almost amusing to see the American media spin that sabotaging of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. The New York Times suggested it, and there was no doubt in Time’s article: Russia sabotaged its own pipeline. There is not a clearer example of wartime propaganda than that. Meanwhile in the real world, the prime suspect is the USA, and it looks like a purposeful sabotage of any peaceful conclusion of the war in Ukraine. Time openly suspected a false flag event, but I wonder if it has ever suspected that the USA has perpetrated false flag events.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Traffic time. This thread will hit 4.1 million views tomorrow, on its way to five million. The human traffic is a small fraction of that, but I am still kind of amazed.

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

As this high hiking season winds down, I want to address my seeming lack of progress on essay work.

It has been a good hiking season, and would be a great one, if I was still working. But when I can go on any day, this one ranks as only good, but very good. It has been all hiking gravy in this lifetime since 2013-2014, and what gravy.

I’ll post up some pics one day soon. But the past month has been limiting, from the wildfire smoke, it is the worst right now, and no rain is forecasted for a couple of weeks. After a record-setting cold and wet spring, this summer was the warmest that Seattle ever experienced, and the driest since 1930. You can’t be sane and continue to deny Global Warming around here. We are setting new records every year. When I moved back here in 1997, for the next 20 years, there was almost never an issue of smoke in Seattle. Now, every summer has a long “smoke season.” This one will last for far more than a month, and we are the lucky ones. The eastern part of the state, over this summer, has nearly continually had smoke. I am attaching an image of the current smoke conditions in the state. Green means good air quality, and yellow, orange, red, and purple mean progressively worse. Anything but green, and I won’t hike. My neighborhood is orange right now, and for the past couple of weeks, it smells like a campfire when I go outside. But I have been able to sneak in hikes here and there, about once a week. Mount Rainier has somehow been spared the worst of it. I hiked there last week and the week before, five times this season so far (1, 2, 3), and might go again this week. I hiked with 12 different people this year, but hiked by myself most of the time.

The GCs know it, as does anybody who thinks about it a little: the arrival of free energy means the end of the world as we know it. And that leaves aside antigravity and other exotic technologies and materials that are in Godzilla’s Golden Hoard. The task that I have set myself to is helping bring that world into being, but I can’t do it alone. I know who I am looking for. Humanity is in a sorry state, and it is easy to become lost in the magnitude of the issues we face, but they can be ranked. Reshuffling the deck of scarcity (which includes all politics) is meaningless compared to abolishing scarcity, and only free energy can do that.

In Nick Lane’s latest book, he made his strongest argument yet for how biology lost its way when it ranked information (DNA) over energy (metabolism). Scientists have long remarked on the nonsensical theories of economists, as they ignore material reality, and the energy issue in particular.

My goal for my upcoming writings is making my strongest and easiest-to-understand case for:

• The role that energy has always played in our universe, the journey of life on Earth, and the human journey;
• How each Epoch of the human journey became more humane than the one before it, as humanity’s energy surplus increased and people could afford to be more humane;
• The transformative potential of free energy;
• The fact that it is here already, but kept from the public’s awareness and use for reasons of Earthly power;
• How I think we can get there.

For the people I seek, those are essential understandings to achieve, and it is necessarily comprehensive. Otherwise, people tend to get lost, disappear down rabbit holes, hack at branches, and advocate the failed approaches for this Epochal task.

By far, the most important part of my effort was my journey of awakening. Without that, the rest would not have happened. Then, I embarked on years of study that have not ended. The least important is the writing itself. It is important, for sure, but without the other two parts, I would have had nothing worth writing.

So, the past two years have been filled with a lot of reading, as preparation for essay work. That part not only did not slow down, but I have done a great deal of study for my upcoming essay work. I can take notes on my Kindle, and email them to myself when finished. I have sent the notes from 53 books to myself (another 20 or so are in process), almost all of them essay-related. I have another 50 physical books on the floor next to my desk, which I have read over recent years, in preparation for this task. I look across the room, and another 30 books are stacked up, from related reading. I am currently reading Peter Bellwood’s latest and maybe last book. Kindles are buggy little devices, and mine crashed yesterday and wiped out my notes on Bellwood’s book so far. It was more than 100 notes, and I am kind of steamed right now. The book is a gold mine for what I am writing about, and I am not sure what to do. I probably will not reread and re-note, but work from memory.

This is a long way of saying that I have been making a lot of progress, but it has not shown up in my published writings. That will be remedied, and soon, especially as the season winds down. We hosted people in our home for two months this year, I was the housekeeper/chauffeur for all of them, and I had other distractions this year. I drive our last guest of the year to the airport this evening. So, the essay writing is about to ramp up. The 10 years after Ed retired were his most prolific as a writer, and I am shooting for the same.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

I finished Bellwood’s book yesterday. I have used his work before in my big essay. The good news is that when I reported yesterday that my Kindle crashed and my notes disappeared, they indeed disappeared, but when I emailed my notes to myself, they appeared in the email, all 384 of them. His book covered “from ape to agriculture.” As I have stated plenty, it was a journey of energy, intelligence, and tools. The book is new, so many recent papers and books are referenced, and I am already reading one of the papers it cited. The book is a gold mine for work like mine. I’ll refrain from getting into too many specifics here, but humanity is the outcome of an amazing feat of evolutionary adaptation, in the chaos of climate change as Earth went into an ice age. Leaving the rainforest, becoming bipedal, which freed the hands for an extraordinary evolutionary adventure, which interacted with the growing brain of the human line, was a unique series of events that resulted in Homo erectus, which had all of the primary attributes of humans. Homo sapiens is merely a more evolved version of Homo erectus. The brain is larger, and that is about it. Later Homo erectus specimens had brains about 95% of the size of Homo sapiens, and might have even bred with Homo sapiens before they were driven to extinction by Homo sapiens, as with Neanderthals and Denisovans.

It looks like Bellwood is not very familiar with the megafauna extinctions and warfare, so I had to take that into account when reading his work. He referred to such events in passing, but admitted that when humans invaded Australia and the Americas, it must have been easy living, at least while the easy meat lasted. Otterbein’s hypothesis has been largely ignored by orthodoxy, but I really have not seen anything that denies it. But domesticating plants would have been a lot harder during the glacial interval, as the air was dryer and carbon dioxide levels lower. That area will be a fun one to write about.

But, Bellwood’s book only confirms the basics of my work, of energy, intelligence, and tools. They all interacted in the human journey, to first result in humanity, which is the most successful predator in Earth’s history, then sedentary living, then civilization, and then industrialization. It is a very clear progression. Of course, that “progression” is making Earth uninhabitable, which my work is trying to help prevent. But my work is more about manifesting the biggest event in the human journey, and Earth will heal as a side-effect, similar to how the demographic transition was a side-effect of industrialization.

It is time for essay work.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Mercola’s site was wiped out by hackers recently. When it went back up, he stopped sending articles that could be made into .pdfs easily, so I won’t be attaching any more articles from him. His articles also cannot be read after a few days unless people subscribe to his site, so I won’t be linking to his articles, either. I reviewed Mercola’s COVID book last year, and it has held up rather well. I have written enough about his work to get the gist of it across, and I’ll periodically link to his articles that Kennedy’s site reproduces, such as this one on how the COVID vaccines do more harm than good.

But, after reading his daily articles since last year, it is time to kind of summarize it and provide my take. To be clear, my awakening began more than 50 years ago, which was my first hint that we have a medical (and many others) racket. I consider Kennedy’s book to be the chronicle of medical racket, 2.0, run by Fauci and Gates, and Lustig’s book was an update of that book that I read in 1970; all processed food is deadly, and is what kills most Americans.

I have been writing about this “pandemic” almost from the beginning, and the medical racket has been in my face like never before. I will not run down the long list of topics, but I’ll just link to one recent issue. The CDC was finally forced by lawsuits to disclose vaccination reaction data that it solicited from people’s cell phones. Unlike VAERS, which collects only about 1% of vaccine reactions, this cell phone data is representative of Americans as a whole. A third of COVID-vaccinated Americans had a significant adverse reaction to the vaccines, and over 7% sought medical care. About 230 million Americans got vaccinated, which means more than 17 million of them needed medical care, and the medical racket and compliant media have covered it all up. Kirsch and others have estimated that more than 500,000 Americans were killed by the COVID vaccines, and I have seen estimates that more than 10 million on Earth were killed by the vaccines. This is just one more worthless, deadly, and lucrative medical intervention, for a disease that the medical racket may well have created.

In Mercola’s book, he got into the global “technocracy” that is here, which is Orwell on steroids. Yesterday’s Mercola article was on the same theme. That is what I want to discuss today, and how it relates to my work. I have written that I am less skeptical of the “technocracy” claims after reading Kennedy’s book, but making a defense against or defeat of “technocracy” the primary goal is hacking at branches, at best, IMO. In that Mercola article, he at least mentioned that the public’s complicity is essential for technocracy to work, and in that way, it is like Manufacturing Consent. But, what I have found is that conspiracists, and I have to put Mercola in that camp, underplay the complicity and overplay the conspiracy. My experience is that such situations are 1% conspiracy and 99% complicity. We are most responsible for our behaviors. Everybody plays along in the medical racket, as in all rackets.

As I have written plenty, few souls ever want to wake up while in physical reality, and they are the sheep that are most easily sheared, learning their lessons the hard way. They and the dark pathers play a deadly game together, and I have watched people choose to eagerly embrace certain death over waking up. It is just what it is. In the Fifth Epoch, people will still largely be asleep, but they will be raised better. Greed and slaughter will no longer be exalted as virtues. One reason why the idea of the Fifth Epoch is greeted with denial and fear is that those souls came here to kill and be killed, and abundance makes the scarcity and fear game obsolete. Sorry!

Yesterday’s Mercola article was about prepping and other strategies to survive and defeat the technocrats, and Bill Gates is their patron saint, who took the baton from the Rockefellers. All conspiracists that I have seen focus intensely on elite misbehaviors and tend to think like victims instead of creators. Mercola published an autobiographical article recently, and mentioned this book as a big influence on him. It is New Age claptrap, IMO, so that said a lot about Mercola.

I am sympathetic to Mercola, but he is shooting for a mass audience, and it shows. Conspiracism is a much easier sell than the introspection that leads to our taking responsibility for our world, our behaviors, and making positive change. Conspiracism only makes elites into another outgroup, and there is nothing enlightened about that. Just as Western medicine treats symptoms and ignores causes (because it would be Game Over if the cause was addressed), focusing on elite behaviors while absolving the masses is looking to symptoms and not causes.

So, Mercola and others are trying, but like Dennis did, they have watered it down into some kind of lowest-common-denominator approach. Brian also played that game to a degree, but in his later years, he had about as good a handle on it as I have seen. In his last book, he wrote about the “four cultures of the phoenix,” which were:

• Truth seekers;
• Deep ecologists;
• Pragmatists;
• Spiritualists.

Structuralists and conspiracists are Brian’s truth seekers, and structuralism is far superior to conspiracism, but neither one, by themselves, will get to the core truths. Deep ecologists are environmentalists, who are wedded to austerity and treat free energy and abundance like the enemy. Pragmatists are “do something” people, such as free energy inventors and entrepreneurs. Their efforts are doomed to failure, as I learned the hard way. Spiritualists are the big picture people, but New Agers are usually naïve and narcissistic, for instance. Brian wrote that to focus too exclusively on any of those cultures led to tunnel vision that doomed their efforts, that only people who combined all four cultures will be able to make a dent, and only spiritualists are capable of that. That is what I am trying to do, to combine those four cultures, in comprehensive fashion, as only a comprehensive awareness can get us over the hump. Mercola has some pieces of the puzzle, on his heroic journey, but not enough to really make the dent that is needed.

Best,

Wade

[Wade Frazier]

Hi:

Yesterday, I finished this book. While beginning this post, I realized that a version that is nearly identical is here. It was only 99 cents to buy from Amazon for my Kindle, and I almost preferred to read it that way. I can lie in bed and read it. Sitting at my desk is taking a physical toll on this old body. So, with the book practically online in that article, a review of it may seem superfluous, but here goes.

Noam has the lead blurb on the book, for good reason. He has been speaking out on that book’s themes ever since Russia invaded Ukraine. Ed wrote about American foreign policy before Noam did, I always liked Ed’s writing better, but Noam is no slouch. His appearance on Goodman’s show was ill-timed, his stance on the unvaccinated was depressing, and all I’ll say for now is that Noam is not a Fifth Epoch guy, but almost nobody on Earth is. He is a creature of his conditioning, too. Now, on to the book. Here is a good review of it.

The book began with the observation that the announced American, and hence, Western, response to Russia’s invasion was a limited humanitarian effort to help Ukraine defend itself. But it quickly became an effort to grind down Russia’s military capability by getting it bogged down in Ukraine. The book’s author, Benjamin Abelow, quoted a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, who ironically observed that the USA “will fight to the last Ukrainian for Ukrainian independence.” That quip was coined early on by sober observers.

I don’t see that the USA is using Ukraine much differently from how it used Afghanistan. While Afghanistan was useful, the Afghan people were worthy victims of the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union withdrew, we let Afghanistan “rot” (in the words of Robert Fisk), to later invade and occupy it, and Biden recently stole several billion dollars from starving Afghanis, who are unworthy victims today (Cambodians had a similar flip-flopping of their status). The Afghani death toll from American interventions, going back for more than 40 years, probably approaches ten million people. Because Ukrainians are white, maybe, just maybe, they will avoid Afghanistan’s fate, but call me skeptical. The USA has always treated Slavs as not-quite-whites.

I met Dennis the month before the Chernobyl meltdown happened, spoke at DOE hearings on the nuclear waste issue, and the nuclear issue has been near and dear to me for many years. About 50 years ago, Brian helped throw water on Nixon’s nuclear fever. I have been familiar with the Chernobyl cover-up for many years, and in the 1990s I followed the grim fate of Ukraine after the Soviet Union’s collapse. I know and have worked with refugees from the Soviet Union’s collapse, and they don’t want to talk about it, like shell-shocked soldiers or Holocaust survivors. The Ukrainian people have suffered greatly in the past century and more, from Stalin to Hitler to Chernobyl. All that time, the people of Ukraine simply have not mattered to the USA, and why should they, halfway around the world with nothing that we covet? Ukraine has never served any American economic interest, but it has become a handy tool to harry Russia in the past generation, like Afghanistan was, and that is a prominent theme in Abelow’s book.

The primary upshot of Abelow’s book is that the USA is purposefully goading Russia toward nuclear war. This is not a new revelation, as Robert Parry wrote about it in 2015. Abelow quoted Gilbert Doctorow in the book and article, and Doctorow’s message to Americans is simple, “Your lives are in danger.” Americans are being put at this risk by the government in Washington, D.C., as they play their imperial games. Perhaps more than a half million Americans have been killed by the COVID vaccines, and it is all being covered up. American elites look to average Americans like a dairy farmer looks at his cows: to be milked for all they are worth, then slaughtered, and Americans largely oblige them.

Abelow laid out this thesis in several short chapters. The idea of Russia’s use of nuclear weapons is dominant, and a Director of National Intelligence testified earlier in the year that the situation that would push Putin to use nuclear weapons was if the war in Ukraine went badly. That is exactly what the USA has made happen, as we flooded Ukraine with weaponry and training, so that they can fight to the last Ukrainian and inflict heavy losses on the Russian invaders.

The first two chapters of Abelow’s book were about the many provocations by the West against Russia, which actually escalated under Trump, and the most important was to continually move NATO eastward, right up to Russia’s borders, and place nuclear-capable missiles right on Russia’s border.

A watershed moment in the provocations was after a NATO meeting in 2008, in which NATO announced its intention to invite Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. The American ambassador to Russia and future CIA director, William Burns, sent a cable back to the USA about his meeting with the Russian foreign minister, who made it clear that inviting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO crossed a red line. Burns titled his cable with “Nyet Means Nyet” (No Means No). Much of Abelow’s book was devoted to how the USA not only ignored Russia’s concerns, but actively humiliated Russia, while Western officials regularly insulted Putin to his face.

The provocations escalated with the Ukrainian coup in 2014, which literally brought neo-Nazis to power in Ukraine. Abelow quoted Mearsheimer on that issue, which I have explored before, so there is no need to belabor it. Ukraine’s “freedom fighters” are led by neo-Nazis, which the American media naturally downplays. The USA loved hiring Nazis, so this makes sense.

Abelow’s third chapter was about the stunning hypocrisy of the USA. If Russia did anything remotely like the USA has, it would have been grounds for war long ago. The USA staked out the Western Hemisphere two centuries ago with its Monroe Doctrine, and other than the Cuban Missile Crisis, no other nation outside the Western Hemisphere has been allowed significant influence in Latin America. Noam has long called out American hypocrisy on such issues, and Ed invented a new term to use when hypocrisy was too tame: chutzpah. American chutzpah has been vividly on display for the entire Ukrainian affair.

The book’s fourth chapter was about legitimate Russian concerns about a first nuclear strike from the USA, which is the only nation that has ever used nukes on another nation, and we justify it to this day.

Long before the 2014 coup, the USA poured several billion dollars of “democracy aid” into Ukraine, and although Ukraine has yet to be admitted to NATO, the USA has been arming and training the Ukrainian military to NATO standards for years. Abelow noted that it is impossible to know just what Putin and his regime thought, but Abelow noted the likely factors:

• The USA and West’s arming and training of the Ukrainian military to NATO standards;
• The ongoing threat that Ukraine would be admitted to NATO;
• The new missile arrays that the USA placed near Russia’s border are nuclear-capable.

Abelow surmised that when it looked like Ukraine was about to get nuclear-capable missiles from the USA, Putin was finally goaded to act.

The book’s fifth chapter was on how, ever since the Soviet Union collapsed, high-ranking American officials warned against expanding NATO toward Russia. The most prominent of them was George Kennan, the very author of the “containment policy” toward the Soviet Union (which Kennan admitted was unnecessary).

In the late 1990s, as NATO expanded, and clearly showed in Yugoslavia that it was an offensive, not defensive, organization (and later in Libya, etc.), Kennan stated:


“I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers turn over in their graves.”


The book’s sixth chapter was on how the Western policy makers who instigated this catastrophe have doubled down and lamented that they were not more hostile toward Russia, to reach Strangelovian levels. Abelow noted the media’s deep complicity in the Big Lies, writing:


“Few in the U.S. media are discussing these things. From watching television and reading the newspapers, one might even imagine that concerns about NATO expansion had never been raised, or that they were of a fringe nature. Although the role of the United States and the NATO countries in creating the crisis in Ukraine should be obvious, many Americans and Europeans have been overcome by a kind of ‘war fever by proxy,’ missing the big picture but preoccupied with the quotidian details of battle, driven by a self-righteous anger and a conviction that the best policy is to pour more and more weapons into Ukraine until such time as Mr. Putin cries uncle.”


John Mearsheimer, who saw this coming in 2014, stated that the West is:


“in an extremely dangerous situation, and Western policy is exacerbating these risks. For Russia’s leaders, what happens in Ukraine has little to do with their imperial ambitions being thwarted; it is about dealing with what they regard as a direct threat to Russia’s future. Mr. Putin may have misjudged Russia’s military capabilities, the effectiveness of the Ukrainian resistance and the scope and speed of the Western response, but one should never underestimate how ruthless great powers can be when they believe they are in dire straits. America and its allies, however, are doubling down, hoping to inflict a humiliating defeat on Mr. Putin and to maybe even trigger his removal. They are increasing aid to Ukraine while using economic sanctions to inflict massive punishment on Russia, a step that Putin now sees as ‘akin to a declaration of war.’”


In his seventh chapter, Abelow covered the West’s cartoon rhetoric on Putin, portraying him as some megalomaniacal madman, opposed by the heroic USA and Europe.


“Major press outlets also bear responsibility. Rather than seeking to contextualize events properly for their readers, the media have trumpeted the government’s preferred narrative. Whatever its motivations, the mainstream media have implemented, and continue to implement, a regime of propaganda that misinforms the public and can only be perceived by Russia as an affront to the national character of its people. Online providers of information are doing much the same. In fact, as the Pulitzer prize-winning journalist and first-amendment lawyer Glenn Greenwald has shown, massive censorship of dissenting views is now occurring at many levels of society in both the United States and Europe.”


Then Abelow stated his main reason for writing:


“My primary goal in this book is to correct a false narrative, and for a very practical reason: because false narratives lead to bad outcomes. Narratives are inevitably reflected in behaviors; they are both descriptive and generative. By functioning as models of reality, narratives serve as guides for action. Then, through the dynamic of action and reaction, push and pushback, they can produce the results they allege are already present. In this way, a narrative that is overly pessimistic about the intentions of a potential opponent, what I term a ‘narrative of suspicion,’ can potentiate the very threats it purports to mitigate.”


Abelow quoted Richard Sakwa, who wrote:


“In the end, NATO’s existence became justified by the need to manage the security threats provoked by its enlargement. The former Warsaw Pact and Baltic states joined NATO to enhance their security, but the very act of doing so created a security dilemma for Russia that undermined the security of all.”


Abelow’s concluding chapter placed the primary responsibility for invading Ukraine on Putin’s shoulders, but noted that a dispassionate review of the facts leads to the conclusion that:


“[…] it becomes clear that policy makers in the United Stated and Europe bear significant responsibility for the war.”


Abelow wrote”


“Had the United States not pushed NATO to the border of Russia; not deployed nuclear-capable missile launch systems in Romania and planned them for Poland and perhaps elsewhere as well; not contributed to the overthrow of the democratically elected Ukrainian government in 2014; not abrogated the ABM treaty and then the intermediate-range nuclear missile treaty, and then disregarded Russian attempts to negotiate a bilateral moratorium on deployments; not conducted live-fire exercises with rockets in Estonia to practice striking targets inside Russia; not coordinated a massive 32-nation military training exercise near Russian territory; not intertwined the U.S. military with that of Ukraine; etc. etc. etc. — had the United States and its NATO allies not done these things, the war in Ukraine probably would not have taken place. I think this is a reasonable assertion.”


Ukrainian president Zelensky is an actor and puppet, not only of the oligarchs who bought the presidency for him, but of the West, too. Sakwa stated that the entire war could have been prevented if Zelensky had just said, “Ukraine will not join NATO.” Abelow wrote that a big reason for Zelensky’s behavior, who was elected on a peace platform, of all things, was his fear for his life from the neo-Nazis, who would kill him if he “appeased” Putin. Abelow wrote that the USA never supported Zelensky’s peace agenda, and that Zelensky’s actions were largely responsible for destroying Ukraine.


Abelow wrote on the insanity of it all:


“And even from a blinkered American perspective, the whole Western plan was a dangerous game of bluff, enacted for reasons that are hard to fathom. Ukraine is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a vital security interest of the United States. In fact, Ukraine hardly matters at all. From an American perspective — and I say this with no disrespect for the Ukrainian people — Ukraine is irrelevant. Ukraine is no more important to the citizens of the United States than any one of fifty other countries that most Americans, for perfectly understandable reasons, couldn’t find on a map without a lot of random searching. So yes, Ukraine is irrelevant to America. And if the leaders of the United States and NATO had acknowledged that obvious fact, none of this would be happening.”

“In contrast, for Russia — with its 1,200-mile shared border and its history of three major land-route invasions from the West, two of them in the last century, and the most recent of which caused the death of roughly 13 percent of the entire Russian population — Ukraine is the most vital of vital interests.”

“[…]The existential threat that Russia perceives from a Western-armed, trained, and militarily integrated Ukraine should have been clear to Washington from the start. Really, what sane person could believe that putting a Western arsenal on Russia’s border would not produce a powerful response? What sane person could believe placing this arsenal would enhance American security? And if any uncertainty remained, it should have been removed in 2008 when the U.S. Ambassador to Russia, William Burns, who now heads Mr. Biden’s CIA, cabled to Washington that, for Russia, Ukraine was the reddest of red lines. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand why. Yet this transparent reality seems opaque to many in the U.S. Departments of State and Defense, in NATO and the media, and to the sitting American president.”

“Frankly, it leaves them — us — in a very bad spot. It is a spot that not only is exceedingly dangerous, putting the entire world at risk of nuclear war: it is one that could only have been arrived at through a level of American governmental stupidity and blindness, and, among the leaders of Europe, a level of deference and cowardice, that is almost inconceivable.”


Abelow finished with:


“Policy makers in Washington and the European capitals — along with the captured, craven media that uncritically amplify their nonsense — are now standing up to their hips in a barrel of viscous mud. How those who were foolish enough to step into that barrel will have the wisdom to extricate themselves before they tip the barrel and take the rest of us down with them, it is hard to imagine.”


I was kind of surprised that Abelow underplayed the Ukrainian attacks on the Donbas, which was Putin’s stated reason for invading. I have seen plenty of scuttlebutt that Ukraine was planning a spring offensive in the Donbas, and that is what finally tipped Putin’s hand, which I have seen called his “taking the bait.” What a grim time to be alive, and it motivates me more than ever to get my work done.

Best,

Wade