The Ten Stages of Genocide 2021 Update

[Vicus]

Posted by Merkaba360 (here)
Great 10 steps to totalitarian poster.



"Why 'good' people enable totalitarians". I would say normal people, not good people. Which is why he had to put good in quotes of course. Normal is not good overall, even if it can do many good deeds. Just look at history. Its the average/normal person who created the consciousness for so much oppression and terrible actions, laws, etc. I prefer to hold good to a higher standard. But of course the normal people will ignore that so they can classify themselves as good and keep on with the habit/program

We can look back 100 or 200 or 500 years and see that normal people were insane in some ways. Example: Believing some race are sub human or should be slaves is definitely mental illness. With the acceleration happening now, if we dont digress, I would think normal people of 2021 will look insane in maybe 30-60 years. lol

Try to use this logic on a normal person and let them know right now they are crazy, mentally ill, whatever. IT just wont be common knowledge for 50-100 years. Im sure they'll enjoy the thought.

But of course, we all know from our perspective that its all meant to be with the evolution of immature consciousness. So, we accept it and are understanding. I guess thats wh most people huddle in tight with the normal crowd, its frustrating to go ahead of the curve.

watch this film : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_(film) how "normal " people became war criminal...

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by Vicus (here)

Posted by Merkaba360 (here)
Great 10 steps to totalitarian poster.



"Why 'good' people enable totalitarians". I would say normal people, not good people. Which is why he had to put good in quotes of course. Normal is not good overall, even if it can do many good deeds. Just look at history. Its the average/normal person who created the consciousness for so much oppression and terrible actions, laws, etc. I prefer to hold good to a higher standard. But of course the normal people will ignore that so they can classify themselves as good and keep on with the habit/program

We can look back 100 or 200 or 500 years and see that normal people were insane in some ways. Example: Believing some race are sub human or should be slaves is definitely mental illness. With the acceleration happening now, if we dont digress, I would think normal people of 2021 will look insane in maybe 30-60 years. lol

Try to use this logic on a normal person and let them know right now they are crazy, mentally ill, whatever. IT just wont be common knowledge for 50-100 years. Im sure they'll enjoy the thought.

But of course, we all know from our perspective that its all meant to be with the evolution of immature consciousness. So, we accept it and are understanding. I guess thats wh most people huddle in tight with the normal crowd, its frustrating to go ahead of the curve.

watch this film : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_(film) how "normal " people became war criminal...

no film at that link

• 'Good' (2008) Movie Trailer:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SxEF2HEoOOI

IMDB - Torrent (Dutch Subs) - Torrent 2

[ExomatrixTV]

• The 10 STAGES OF GENOCIDE may be happening here, NOW

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_qUz-d0_vLA

Glenn says it’s clear WHO the far-left currently is targeting and WHAT is coming. Because history is repeating itself, he says, and like so many Jews who did not escape before World War II, are we failing to see the signs? Glenn and Pat go through the ’10 stages of genocide,’ and some of the early ones are frighteningly similar to what we’re experiencing in America today.

[Johan (Keyholder)]

Hi John.

First of all, thanks for all the very useful information you have brought to this forum. And continue to bring!
I am sure that many, many people here appreciate your efforts.

The title of the video above, "Why aren't we leaving America?", (or Holland, or Belgium... or any country you care to insert here) reminds me of an old song (from 1972), "Vluchten kan niet meer." (="You can't escape anymore"). I am sure you know that song, it was one of the most popular songs then, in Dutch speaking territories.

While there are many parallels with the WWII situation (holocaust etc), the situation now is way different.

Because it is worldwide (not just the USA), where would/could one go?
In what circumstances could/should one live there?

At least, over here at PA, sensible people ponder those questions. But that does not mean that answers are readily found.

Still, I do think PA is one of the better places to "exchange ideas" about this subject.

So, let's continue that search...

[Pam]

I wanted to share this video as it definitely speak to the mental prerequisites for Genocide. This is a Mark Dice video where he goes down to a California beach and pretends to do a questionnaire or to get signatures for legislation change. Whether you like the guy or not it is very interesting when he asks if people will sign a petition requesting the arrest and the detention of the unvaxxinated. Fortunately, some refused but it is really interesting to watch the ones that readily agree with it. No asking questions. He really pushes the totalitarian aspects to comedic level and some were more than willing to sign.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=TBRLUGMeBL4

[Matthew]

Posted by Matthew (here)


I saw this list for the first time just now. I've seen it before, but suddenly steps one to four came home

The CDC say that ‘high-risk individuals’ will be forcibly taken into Green Camps for an ‘indeterminate’ time. Source: Stew Peters report via twitter

Since covid risk has been hugely misrepresented, what risk are they talking about? - a rhetorical question

What the CDC have announced reminds me of number seven on the genocide poster.

[onawah]

Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID 19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...n-Settings.pdf

"The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease ("high-risk") and the general population ("low-risk"). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or "green zones" established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.1,2 They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents."

(I just heard that they are still putting up FEMA camps, and that there is one very near where I am living. This operation hasn't started in the US...yet...as I understand it, but clearly they are planning for it.

[onawah]

CDC PUBLISHES ‘GREEN ZONE’ CONCENTRATION CAMP PROTOCOL, PREPARING MASS IMPRISONMENT
8/10/21
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/cdc...s-imprisonment

"The CDC has a plan in place to transport “high risk” people to “Green Zone Shelters”, where they will be segregated for long periods of time of potentially 6 months or indefinitely, based on the vagaries of the fake pandemic, according to this document, entitled Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings, which was posted to the CDC’s website just over a year ago and which addresses “physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population.”

The document highlights a) risks and challenges of implementing this approach, b) need for additional resources in areas with limited or reduced capacity, c) indefinite timeline, and d) possible short-term and long-term adverse consequences.

The document also notes that, “Separating families and disrupting and deconstructing multigenerational households may have long-term negative consequences…[and let’s not forget the all-important issue-of-issues]: Restrictive gender norms may be exacerbated by isolation strategies such as shielding.”

The CDC concedes that, “While the shielding approach is not meant to be coercive, it may appear forced or be misunderstood in humanitarian settings [aka the fake pandemic]. As with many community interventions meant to decrease COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, compliance and behavior change are the primary rate-limiting steps and may be driven by social and emotional factors.”

DeAnna Lorraine joins Stew Peters with more on this story."


Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/vi6z39

[Delight]

We absolutely are at a place which is either we over rule this plan or we are all exterminated. We cannot expect that if we sit tight, things will get better. "Is there a remedy?" What can we do now?

Presented by Doctors for Covid Ethics and hosted by UK Column, the COVID-19 Interdisciplinary Symposium took place on July 29th and 30th.

Session IV: The Hour of Justice with Patrick Henningsen, Reiner Fuellmich, Sucharit Bhakdi, Vera Sharav, and guest speaker

Doctors for Covid Ethics Symposium - Session 4: The Hour of Justice

[ExomatrixTV]

• Milgram Experiment + Updates!
  

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xOYLCy5PVgM

• More Shocking Results: New research replicates Milgram's findings

Nearly 50 years after the controversial Milgram experiments, social psychologist Jerry M. Burger, PhD, has found that people are still just as willing to administer what they believe are painful electric shocks to others when urged on by an authority figure.
Burger, a professor at Santa Clara University, replicated one of the famous obedience experiments of the late Stanley Milgram, PhD, and found that compliance rates in the replication were only slightly lower than those found by Milgram. And, like Milgram, he found no difference in the rates of obedience between men and women.
"People learning about Milgram's work often wonder whether results would be any different today," Burger says. "Many point to the lessons of the Holocaust and argue that there is greater societal awareness of the dangers of blind obedience. But what I found is the same situational factors that affected obedience in Milgram's experiments still operate today."


Stanley Milgram, PhD, was an assistant professor at Yale in 1961 when he conducted the first in a series of experiments in which subjects—thinking they were testing the effect of punishment on learning—administered what they believed were increasingly powerful electric shocks to another person in a separate room. An authority figure conducting the experiment prodded the first person, who was assigned the role of "teacher," to continue shocking the other person, who was playing the role of "learner." In reality, both the authority figure and the learner were in on the real intent of the experiment, and the imposing-looking shock generator machine was a fake.


Milgram found that, after hearing the learner's first cries of pain at 150 volts, 82.5 percent of participants continued administering shocks; of those, 79 percent continued to the shock generator's end, at 450 volts. In Burger's replication, 70 percent of the participants had to be stopped as they continued past 150 volts—a difference that was not statistically significant.


Burger implemented a number of safeguards that enabled him to win approval for the work from his university's institutional review board, including making 150 volts the top range in his study. Burger also screened out anyone who had taken more than two psychology courses in college or who indicated familiarity with Milgram's research. A clinical psychologist also interviewed potential subjects and eliminated anyone who might have a negative reaction to the study procedure.

—K.I. Mills

• source

How Would People Behave in Milgram’s Experiment Today?

More than fifty years ago, then Yale psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted the famous—or infamous—experiments on destructive obedience that have come to be known as “Milgram’s shocking experiments” (pun usually intended). Milgram began his experiments in July 1961, the same month that the trial of Adolf Eichmann—the German bureaucrat responsible for transporting Jews to the extermination camps during the Holocaust—concluded in Jerusalem. The trial was made famous by the philosopher Hannah Arendt’s reports, later published in book form as Eichmann in Jerusalem. Arendt claimed that Eichmann was a colorless bureaucrat who blandly followed orders without much thought for the consequences, and whose obedient behavior demonstrated the “banality of evil.”

Milgram himself was Jewish, and his original question was whether nations other than Germany would differ in their degrees of conformity to authority. He assumed that the citizens of America, home of rugged individualism and apple pie, would display much lower levels of conformity when commanded by authorities to engage in behavior that might harm others. His Yale experiments were designed to set a national baseline.

Half of a century after Milgram probed the nature of destructive obedience to authority, we are faced with the unsettling question: What would citizens do today?

• The Original Experiment

In Milgram’s original experiment, participants took part in what they thought was a “learning task.” This task was designed to investigate how punishment—in this case in the form of electric shocks—affected learning. Volunteers thought they were participating in pairs, but their partner was in fact a confederate of the experimenter. A draw to determine who would be the “teacher” and who would be the “learner” was rigged; the true volunteer always ended up as the teacher and the confederate as learner.


The pairs were moved into separate rooms, connected by a microphone. The teacher read aloud a series of word pairs, such as “red–hammer,” which the learner was instructed to memorize. The teacher then read the target word (red), and the learner was to select the original paired word from four alternatives (ocean, fan, hammer, glue).

• Did Milgram’s experiment demonstrate that humans have a universal propensity to destructive obedience or that they are merely products of their cultural moment?

If the learner erred, the teacher was instructed to deliver an electric shock as punishment, increasing the shock by 15-volt increments with each successive error. Although the teacher could not see the learner in the adjacent room, he could hear his responses to the shocks as well as to the questions. According to a prearranged script, at 75 volts, the learner started to scream; from 150 volts to 330 volts, he protested with increasing intensity, complaining that his heart was bothering him; at 330 volts, he absolutely refused to go on. After that the teacher’s questions were met by silence. Whenever the teacher hesitated, the experimenter pressed the teacher to continue, insisting that the “the experiment requires that you continue” and reminding him that “although the shocks may be painful, they cause no permanent tissue damage.”
Milgram was horrified by the results of the experiment. In the “remote condition” version of the experiment described above, 65 percent of the subjects (26 out of 40) continued to inflict shocks right up to the 450-volt level, despite the learner’s screams, protests, and, at the 330-volt level, disturbing silence. Moreover, once participants had reached 450 volts, they obeyed the experimenter’s instruction to deliver 450-volt shocks when the subject continued to fail to respond.

• Putting Milgram’s Work in Context

Milgram’s experiment became the subject of a host of moral and methodological critiques in the 1960s. These became somewhat moot with the publication of the American Psychological Association’s ethical principles of research with human subjects in 1973 and the restrictions on the use of human subjects included in the National Research Act of 1974, which effectively precluded psychologists from conducting experiments that, like Milgram’s, were likely to cause serious distress to subjects. This was undoubtedly a good thing for experimental subjects, but it also blocked attempts to answer a question that many were asking: Did Milgram’s experiment demonstrate that humans have a universal propensity to destructive obedience or that they are merely products of their cultural moment?

Cross-cultural studies at the time provided a partial answer. The U.S. mean obedience rate of 60.94 percent was not significantly different from the foreign mean obedience rate of 65.94 percent, although there was wide variation in the results (rates ranged from 31 to 91 percent in the U.S. and from 28 to 87.5 percent in foreign studies) and design of the studies. However, a historical question remained: Would subjects today still display the same levels of destructive obedience as the subjects of fifty years ago?

There are grounds to believe they would not. In the 1950s, psychologists and the general public were shocked by the results of Solomon Asch’s experiments on conformity. In a series of line-judgement studies, subjects were asked to decide which of three comparison lines matched a target line. Crucially, these judgements were made in a social context, among other participants. Only one of the subjects in the experiment was a naive subject, while the other six were confederates of the experimenter instructed to give incorrect answers. When they gave answers that were incorrect, and seemed plainly incorrect to the naive subjects, about one-third of the naive subjects gave answers that conformed with the majority. In other words, people were happy to ignore the evidence before their eyes in order to conform to the group consensus.


For some observers, these results threatened America’s image as the land of individualism and autonomy. Yet in the 1980s, replications of Asch’s experiment failed to detect even minimal levels of conformity, suggesting that Asch’s results were a child of 1950s, the age of “other-directed” people made famous by David Reisman in his 1950 work The Lonely Crowd. Might the same failure to replicate be true today if people faced Milgram’s experiment anew?

• Understanding Milgram’s Work Today

Although full replications of Milgram’s experiment are precluded in the United States because of ethical and legal constraints on experimenters, there have been replications attempted in other countries, and attempts by U.S. experimenters to sidestep these constraints.

A replication conducted by Dariusz Dolinski and colleagues in 2015 generated levels of obedience higher than the original Milgram experiment, although the study may be criticized because it employed lower levels of shock.

More intriguing was the 2009 replication by Jerry Burger, who found an ingenious way of navigating the ethical concerns about Milgram’s original experiment. Burger noted that in the original experiment 79 percent of subjects who continued after the 150 volts—after the learner’s first screams—continued all the way to the end of the scale, at 450 volts. Assuming that the same would be true of subjects today, Burger determined how many were willing to deliver shocks beyond the 150-volt level, at which point the experiment was discontinued.

• Given social support, most subjects refused to continue to administer shocks, suggesting that social solidarity serves as a kind of a defense against destructive obedience to authority.

About 70 percent were willing to continue the experiment at this point, suggesting that subjects remain just as compliant in the 21st century. Nonetheless, Burger’s study was based upon a questionable assumption, namely that 150-volt compliance has remained a reliable predictor of 450-volt compliance. Subjects today might be willing to go a bit beyond 150 volts, but perhaps not to the far end of the scale (after learners demand that the experiment be discontinued etc.). In fact, this assumption begs the critical question at issue.

However, French television came to the rescue. One game show replicated Milgram’s experiment, with the game show host as the authority and the “questioner” as the subject. In a study reported in the 2012 European Review of Applied Psychology, J.-L. Beauvois and colleagues replicated Milgram’s voice feedback condition, with identical props, instructions, and scripted learner responses and host prods. One might question whether a game show host has as much authority as a scientific experimenter, but whatever authority they had managed to elicit levels of obedience equivalent to Milgram’s original experiment (in fact somewhat higher, 81 percent as opposed to the original 65 percent). It would seem that at least French nationals are as compliant today as Milgram’s original subjects in the 1960s.

In fact, the replication suggests a darker picture. One of optimistic findings of the original Milgram experiment was his condition 7, in which there were three teachers, two of whom (both confederates of the experimenter) defied the experimenter. Given this social support, most subjects refused to continue to administer shocks, suggesting that social solidarity serves as a kind of a defense against destructive obedience to authority. Unfortunately, this did not occur in the French replication, in which the production assistant protested about the immorality of the procedure with virtually no effect on levels of obedience. And unfortunately, not in the Burger study either: Burger found that the intervention of an accomplice who refused to continue had no effect on the levels of obedience. So it may be that we are in fact more compliant today than Milgram’s original subjects, unmoved by social support. A dark thought for our dark times.

• source

ABC Channel's Milgram Experiment remake:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=JnYUl6wlBF4

• Taking Orders to Be Violent Might be Easier Than You Think

Two researchers at a Polish University recreated the Milgram Shock Experiment.

• Revisiting Milgram’s Shocking Obedience Experiments

[ExomatrixTV]

• Experimenter_(film) ... IMDB ... Torrent

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=O1VOZhwRvWo

• The Milgram Experiment | THE HEIST | Derren Brown

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Xxq4QtK3j0Y

• Moved to do harm:

As studies of irrational decision making took off around 50 years ago, so did a field of research with especially troubling implications. Social psychologists put volunteers into experimental situations that, in their view, exposed a human weakness for following the crowd and obeying authority. With memories of the Nazi campaign to exterminate Europe’s Jews still fresh, two such experiments became famous for showing the apparent ease with which people abide by heinous orders and abuse power.

First, Yale psychologist Stanley Milgram reported in 1963 that 65 percent of volunteers obeyed an experimenter’s demands to deliver what they thought were increasingly powerful and possibly lethal electric shocks to an unseen person — who was actually working with Milgram — as punishments for erring on word-recall tests. This widely publicized finding appeared to unveil a frightening willingness of average folks to carry out the commands of evil authorities (SN: 8/20/77, p. 117).

A disturbing follow-up to Milgram’s work was the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment, which psychologist Philip Zimbardo halted after six days due to escalating chaos among participants. Male college students assigned to play guards in a simulated prison had increasingly abused mock prisoners, stripping them naked and denying them food. Student “prisoners” became withdrawn and depressed.

Zimbardo argued that extreme social situations, such as assuming the role of a prison guard, will overwhelm self-control. Even mild-mannered college kids can get harsh when clad in guards’ uniforms and turned loose on their imprisoned peers, he said.

• Volunteers in Stanley Milgram’s obedience-to-authority experiments thought they were giving shocks to people who erred on a test, such as the seated man here, who was actually working with Milgram.© 1968 by S. Milgram, © Renewed 1993 by Alexandra Milgram. From The Film Obedience Distributed by Alexander Street Press

When college students assumed the roles of guards (left) and prisoners (right) in the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment, the group descended into chaos within a few days.P.G. Zimbardo

Milgram’s and Zimbardo’s projects contained human drama and conflict that had widespread, and long-lasting, public appeal. A 1976 made-for-television movie based on Milgram’s experiment, titled The Tenth Level, starred William Shatner. A 2010 movie inspired by the Stanford Prison Experiment, simply called The Experiment, starred Academy Award winners Adrien Brody and Forest Whitaker.

Despite the lasting cultural impact of the obedience-to-authority and prison experiments, some researchers have questioned Milgram’s and Zimbardo’s conclusions. Milgram conducted 23 obedience experiments, although only one was publicized. Overall, volunteers usually delivered the harshest shocks when encouraged to identify with Milgram’s scientific mission to understand human behavior. No one followed the experimenter’s order, “You have no other choice, you must go on.”

Indeed, people who follow orders to harm others are most likely to do so because they identify with a collective cause that morally justifies their actions, argued psychologists S. Alexander Haslam of the University of Queensland and Stephen Reicher of the University of St. Andrews in Scotland 40 years after the famous obedience study. Rather than blindly following orders, Milgram’s volunteers cooperated with an experimenter when they viewed participation as scientifically important — even if, as many later told Milgram, they didn’t want to deliver shocks and felt bad after doing so.
Data from the 1994 ethnic genocide in the African nation of Rwanda supported that revised take on Milgram’s experiment (SN: 8/19/17, p. 22). In a 100-day span, members of Rwanda’s majority Hutu population killed roughly 800,000 ethnic Tutsis. Researchers who later examined Rwandan government data on genocide perpetrators estimated that only about 20 percent of Hutu men and a much smaller percentage of Hutu women seriously injured or killed at least one person during the bloody episode. Most Hutus rejected pressure from political and community leaders to join the slaughter.

Neither did Zimbardo’s prisoners and guards passively accept their assigned roles. Prisoners at first challenged and rebelled against guards. When prisoners learned from Zimbardo that they would have to forfeit any money they’d already earned if they left before the experiment ended, their solidarity plummeted, and the guards crushed their resistance. Still, a majority of guards refused to wield power tyrannically, favoring tough-but-fair or friendly tactics.

In a second prison experiment conducted by Haslam in 2002, guards were allowed to develop their own prison rules rather than being told to make prisoners feel powerless, as Zimbardo had done. In a rapid chain of events, conflict broke out between one set of guards and prisoners who formed a communal group that shared power and another with guards and prisoners who wanted to institute authoritarian rule. Morale in the communal group sank rapidly. Haslam stopped the experiment after eight days. “It’s the breakdown of groups and resulting sense of powerlessness that creates the conditions under which tyranny can triumph,” Haslam concluded.

Milgram’s and Zimbardo’s experiments set the stage for further research alleging that people can’t control certain harmful attitudes and behaviors. A test of the speed with which individuals identify positive or negative words and images after being shown white and Black faces has become popular as a marker of unconscious racial bias. Some investigators regard that test as a window into hidden prejudice — and implicit bias training has become common in many workplaces. But other scientists have questioned whether it truly taps into underlying bigotry. Likewise, stereotype threat, the idea that people automatically act consistently with negative beliefs about their race, sex or other traits when subtly reminded of those stereotypes, has also attracted academic supporters and critics.

• source

• Would You Deliver an Electric Shock in 2015? Obedience in the Experimental Paradigm Developed by Stanley Milgram in the 50 Years Following the Original Studies

[Franny]

A fairly useful path to genocide is to have isolation facilities, or as they were known in the 1940s, Concentration Camps, where "Arbite Macht Frei" though the Tennessee inmates may not be subject to forced labor.

Now it seems the Governor of Tennessee has signed an executive order to set up isolation health facilities for the unclean. Like the Jews of the time were accused of spreading disease, so are those who have so far not subjected themselves to the shot. Even with government statistics showing the majority of new patients have received two shots and some have received three in some areas of the US and world. The most detailed numbers seem to come from Israel and the UK with little official information from the US.

Sarah Westall explains:

https://sarahwestall.com/did-governo...e-covid-camps/

It has been going viral that Governor Lee of Tennessee has authorized the construction of COVID camps on August 6, 2021 when he sign executive order 83 into law.

In an effort to fact check whether this is true or not, I took the time to read the entire executive order so I could know for my myself whether he really did authorize COVID camps or whether it’s an exaggeration.

After fully reading the executive order, I conclude that he did indeed sign an executive order that would allow COVID camps and “isolation facilities” to be constructed and that this legislation represents a serious threat to the American people.

The question is, what do they truly intend to do with these facilities? We may not be able to nail down precisely what they plan to do, but the legislation, in the way it is written, will enable those in power to do whatever they want without any oversight.

The executive order has 21 sections. The first 18 sections are focused on expanding the “needs” of Tennessee’s health care system. The last 4 sections, 18-21, are the ones that are the most concerning and it’s where he explicitly signs into law the ability to construct camps where any kind of nefarious activities could occur.

Section 18 gives authorities the right to construct “quarantine and isolation facilities” and sections 19-21 removes inspections and licensing of health care facilities and services. Here are those 4 sections for you to read yourself:

18. Temporary quarantine and isolation facilities may be constructed

The provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-11-202( c )( 1 )-(8), are hereby suspended to allow for the construction of temporary structures, the plans for which would otherwise be subject to review for new construction, additions, or substantial alterations, as directed by the Commissioner of Health and the Director of TEMA in response to COVID-19; provided, that there shall be inspections of such structures to ensure safety, as necessary.

19. Inspection of mental health and substance abuse facilities and services are suspended.

The provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 33-2-413(a), are hereby suspended to the extent necessary to give the Commissioner of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services the authority to suspend the required unannounced life safety and environmental inspections of licensed services or facilities, absent the death of a service recipient at the service or facility with an indication of possible abuse or neglect by the service or facility or its employees or a request for placement assistance from law enforcement or state or federal agencies regarding the service or facility.

20. Health care Licensing inspections and investigations are suspended to increases resources available to fight COVID- 19 and to protect public health.

The provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated, Titles 63 and 68, and related rules and policies are hereby suspended to the extent necessary to suspend any requirement that the Department of Health conduct inspections or investigations of a licensee, including, but not limited to, complaint investigations, routine surveys, and site visits. However, the Department of Health retains the authority to conduct any inspection or investigation when, in the Department’s sole discretion, the public health, safety, or welfare necessitates such inspection or investigation.

21. Inspections of health care facilities are suspended.

The provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-11-210(a)(l), arc hereby suspended to the extent necessary to suspend the requirement that the Department of Health conduct inspections of facilities applying for licensure if the applicant facility is physically located in the same location as another licensed facility where patients have been seen within the thirty (30) days preceding the submission of the application. In instances where the Department of Health elects to not inspect a facility applying for licensure, such provisions requiring a facility applying for licensure to be inspected are hereby suspended.

Did Governor Lee of Tennessee Really Approve COVID Camps?

Those who follow this site, and other sources doing real journalism, know that we would not need these measures to manage COVID based on the infection and death rates, therapeutics, and prevention measures we already know about. If the vaccine really does what they claim and the numbers are what they are from last season, why would we need these measures?

Because the facts and actions to not make logical sense, it becomes very worrisome that this legislation represents a serious threat to the American people, especially those in Tennessee.

[Franny]

The detainment measures seem to be ramping up across the planet recently, including the US. The plan is in motion and now observable to the public, although not yet in detail.

It seems to have garnered little attention, including here on the forum. But in the interest of documenting the move, I have posted it.

The video has been moved to the bottom as it overwrites any text below it.

MILITARY PREPARES TO DETAIN US CITIZENS, DOCUMENTS EXPOSE ‘INTERNMENT PROCEDURE’

MILITARY PREPARES TO DETAIN US CITIZENS

The Army National Guard is recruiting for the job of Internment/Resettlement Specialist. Military documents refer to "civilian internees" and procedures for detaining U.S. citizens.

The military is requiring the vaccine (and unvaccinated West Point cadets are put in solitary confinement, as we reported).

A Biden Defense document shows the military coaching soldiers to report other soldiers for suspected white supremacy.

National File Senior Reporter, Patrick Howley, joins Stew Peters to reveal the horrific authoritarian preparation for mass incarceration.




National File Senior Reporter, Patrick Howley, joins Stew Peters to report that the Army National Guard is recruiting for the job of "Internment/Resettlement Specialist". Military documents refer to "civilian internees" and procedures for detaining US citizens.

This, just after Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed Executive Order 83, giving the state permission to call up the National Guard and State Guard "in connection with certain health care and emergency services operations".

Executive Order 83 would permit the construction of "temporary quarantine and isolation facilities" and "telephone assessments for involuntary commitment cases."

A separate Lloyd Austin DoD document shows the military coaching soldiers to report other soldiers for "suspected white supremacy".

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has issued a new National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) Bulletin regarding the current heightened threat environment across the United States, now through November 11th, listing the following as their top concerns:

• Opposition to COVID measures
• Claims of election fraud, belief Trump can be reinstated
• 9/11 anniversary and religious holidays.

"RMVEs", the new federale slur for "Trump voters" remain a major obsession of the DHS:

Through the remainder of 2021, racially- or ethnically-motivated
violent extremists (RMVEs) and anti-government/anti-authority violent extremists will remain a national threat priority for the United States. These extremists may seek to exploit the emergence of COVID-19 variants by viewing the potential re-establishment of public health restrictions across the United States as a rationale to conduct attacks. Pandemic-related stressors have contributed to increased societal strains and tensions, driving several plots by domestic violent extremists, and they may contribute to more violence this year.

On August 6, New York Congressman Ritchie Torres sponsored the bill, H.R.4980 - "To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that any individual traveling on a flight that departs from or arrives to an airport inside the United States or a territory of the United States is fully vaccinated against COVID-19, and for other purposes."

This fits with reports that the Biden administration is considering mandating vaccines for interstate travel (while allowing millions of illegal migrants to cross the southern border and to get free bus- and plane rides into the interior of the country without ID).

On August 11, the Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously on an ordinance that denies unvaccinated people access to grocery stores.

All of the above is exactly the kind of language Clif High said his predictive linguistics were picking up a couple of weeks ago; the true purpose of these announcements is to cause people to go out into the streets in protest, where the Feds will set them up, like during 1/6 or the Euromaidan.

Clif believes this is a perfect example of Sun Tzu’s axiom to "Look strong when you are weak," as he sees more and more information coming out, leading to a total collapse of the gaslighting propaganda Fake News media within weeks.

Clif calls for cool heads to prevail. "If nobody attends their party this time, because we’ve all wised-up, then it’s going to be them with their smoke grenades and flash bangs, all by themselves, fighting amongst their own fake Trumpers...

"This is an information war and we win by having the hearts and minds of the people. This is how you win a counterinsurgency, such as what we are now in."

Speaking of war, the Taliban have taken control of 16 of Afghanistan's 34 provinces and 18 of its provincial capitals, including a suburb of Kabul in the past 8 days. The US-trained and -funded Afghan military is largely defecting to the Taliban.

Bill Roggio, Editor of Long War Journal told the PBS NewsHour, "I think this is one of the greatest intelligence failures in decades – certainly in US military history. The Taliban organized this offensive, it planned it, it prepared, it organized, it recruited, it deployed fighters, it prepositioned war material, all under the nose of the nose of the US military, NATO and Afghan intelligence."

Roggio tweeted, "US military/intelligence leaders are directly responsible for the biggest intelligence failure since Tet in 1968. How did the Taliban plan, organize, position, and execute this massive offensive nation wide offensive under the noses of USMIL, CIA, DIA, NDS, ANDSF, etc.?"

In my opinion this, too is being done on purpose. All of the above is part of the Globalists' unrestricted warfare campaign to utterly demoralize you and me about the complete capture of our federal and local governments and the military.\



Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/vihpy9

[Bubu]

The "dumbing" down stage is the most important stage, since a very small group can not kill billions of thinking people unless they are first dumb down and convinced to jump off the cliff and "trust me its for your own good". The dumbness is now more pronounce than ever. Long lines of people on the killing station (vax station) everyday.
perfectly normal for the author to miss the most important stage.

[Eva2]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_br...od%2B7%2B18%3D

Taliban Seizes Presidential Palace, to Soon Declare Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan
BY VENUS UPADHAYAYA August 15, 2021 Updated: August 15, 2021 biggersmaller Print
The Taliban has entered the presidential palace in the capital city Kabul and is now in control of the entire country, according to a highly placed source. The group is soon expected to declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

An anonymous source in a position to know confirmed the high-ranking source’s report of the seizure of the presidential palace, which The Times of India has also reported.

President Ashraf Ghani left Kabul after stepping down from power on Sunday. Rumors of his resignation had been circulating since Friday, while fears of the Taliban attacking the capital were also high that night.

However, in a video message released on Saturday afternoon, Ghani didn’t announce his resignation but said negotiations were ongoing. The anonymous source told The Epoch Times that Ghani’s announcement meant he will not step down until the whole country surrenders or falls to the Taliban.

“All soldiers said their commanders, after receiving messages to surrender from Kabul decided to surrender,” said the anonymous source. It wasn’t however clear under what circumstances these orders were given, and this hasn’t been confirmed with additional sources.

“Two of the biggest army corps in west and north of Afghanistan surrendered without any resistance with all their armored vehicles. Each of them has over 10,000 personnel on their compounds,” said the anonymous source on Saturday night.

Kunar and Paktia provinces fell to the Taliban on Saturday and by Sunday morning there were many messages on social media about the Taliban coming to Kabul from different directions, as panic and uncertainty spread among the people in the capital. There were also rumors about a transitional government being formed.

By Sunday morning the Afghan media had started to report that two Taliban officials have told Reuters that they will take over power completely, and there’ll be no transitional government.

However, the Taliban in a statement in Pashtu released on the same day said that their fighters are ordered not to enter Kabul as they are “negotiating a peaceful transition of power” with the current government.

By Sunday night sources confirmed that the Taliban had entered the presidential palace and taken over Kabul and the country. They are soon to declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, sources said.

Pictures of Taliban inside the Presidential palace had started appearing on Afghan media as well as Al Jazeera by late Sunday night in Kabul.

There were social media messages of panic as pictures started appearing of people leaving homes and gathering around the airport to be under the U.S. army’s protection.

“City is so calm but sounds of gunshots and helicopters are flying around the city,” said the anonymous source an hour before midnight in midnight in Kabul.

The whole situation leaves many unanswered questions.

Rajiv Dogra, a former Indian diplomat and the author of “Durand’s Curse,” a best-selling and critically acclaimed book about the division of Afghanistan by the British empire, told The Epoch Times by email that the last few days in Afghanistan have been bewildering.

“Taliban are rubbing their eyes in disbelief at the speed with which the Afghan forces crumbled. There is no doubt that post-mortem analysis will follow in the conference halls around the world. Many new theories will try to explain what happened,” said Dogra.

“But a ready and quick term to describe the events of last week would be, ‘Failure on all Fronts.’ Former President Ghani fled most non-heroically, leaving the Afghan people in a lurch.”

Just around the time reports of Ghani fleeing the country started appearing on social media, his Vice President, Amrullah Saleh said in a message on Twitter that he’ll not “bow” before the Taliban.

“I will never, ever & under no circumstances bow to d Talib terrorists. I will never betray the soul & legacy of my hero Ahmad Shah Masoud, the commander, the legend & the guide. I won’t dis-appoint millions who listened to me. I will never be under one ceiling with the Taliban. NEVER,” he wrote. There are rumors of his fleeing but there are no clear reports.

Late Sunday night, former Afghan war correspondent Wali Arian tweeted out a message he said was from Ghani in which the former president said he fled the country to prevent bloodshed.

“Today I faced a difficult choice. If I had stayed in the citadel, the Taliban would have shown that they were ready to attack Kabul and its people to drive me away. If I had survived, countless patriots would have been martyred and Kabul would have been destroyed. I knew I had better go to prevent a flood of blood.”

The Biden administration is likely to evacuate most of its personnel to safety but Dogra said the United States has suffered an irreparable loss to its reputation as a global leader.

“The US has suffered a major loss of reputation; perhaps far more so than its exit from Vietnam. Its plea with the Taliban for the safe exit of its embassy staff was a groveling surrender by the ‘Sole Superpower’ of the world to a force of terror.”



Venus Upadhayaya
Venus Upadhayaya
REPORTER
Venus Upadhayaya reports on wide range of issues. Her area of expertise is in Indian and South Asian geopolitics. She has reported from the very volatile India-Pakistan border and has contributed to mainstream print media in India for about a decade. Community media, sustainable development, and leadership remain her key areas of interest.