All posts by Mickey Z.

For kids in schools, PCBs are more common and more dangerous than guns

CB is short for polychlorinated biphenyls — a group of manmade pollutants that were banned by the U.S. Congress in 1979. Despite this ban, the many PCBs that were used in the construction of school buildings from the 1930s to the 1970s are still exposing kids to a dangerous threat.

PCBs are listed as a possible carcinogen in humans and have caused cancer in other animals. They were once widely used in products ranging from TVs and refrigerators to window caulking.

In schools, PCBs in window caulking is typically activated by sunlight. This creates an invisible fog that permeates a classroom full of children all day, almost every day. U.S. school districts are required to test for asbestos and lead. There are no laws mandating any tests for PCBs.

PCB exposure is linked with negative effects on the

  • endocrine system
  • immune system
  • nervous system
  • reproductive system

It’s been associated with health effects like:

  • Permanently depressed IQ
  • Increased risk of attentional deficits
  • Hormonal and immune disruptions
  • Melanomas
  • Cancers of the liver, gall bladder, biliary tract, gastrointestinal cancer, and brain

After the latest school shooting, plenty of parents expressed genuine concern about their children’s safety. Keep in mind: Almost certainly, as you read this, there is not a school shooting in progress. But, as you read this, innumerable school kids are being placed in harm’s way — day after day after day — thanks to corporate indifference and the ignorance of the general population.

Speaking of ignorance… 

Diisononyl phthalate (DINP) is used as a plasticizer (which means it makes products softer and more pliable). It impacts all of us but please allow me to stick with the theme of this post. DINP reaches our children before they are even born.

It’s found in products like:

  • Cosmetics
  • Perfume
  • Nail polish
  • Hair spray
  • Soap
  • Shampoo
  • Skin moisturizers
  • Detergents
  • Food packaging

When pregnant women use these ubiquitous products, DINP has been shown to impact babies in utero. This is associated with:

  • Learning, attention, and behavior problems
  • Lower IQ
  • Memory problems
  • Record rates of autism

Once those children are born, they can again encounter dangerous DINP at home and in schools via:

  • Building materials
  • Flooring
  • Wire and cable insulation
  • Wood finishes
  • Plastic plumbing pipes
  • Adhesives

DINP impacts the sexual development of children. For example:

  • Decreases sperm motility
  • Increases malformations of the testes and other organs
  • Feminizes boys in terms of their sex organ placement and size (e.g. smaller penises and testes)
  • Can make boys infertile when they reach adulthood

More generally, DINP and other phthalates have been shown to cause:

  • Fertility issues
  • Miscarriages
  • Birth defects
  • High blood pressure and insulin resistance (can lead to diabetes)
  • Testicular, kidney, and liver cancers

So, where’s the “March For Our Lives” for the victimized children?

The information stated above offers just a tiny sampling of the world we’ve enabled while distracted by fake news, celebrities, sports, video games, reality TV, porn, etc.


  • Stop fixating on the problems (e.g. gun control, Ukraine, etc.) being marketed to you by the media
  • Do not EVER trust a corporation (Big Pharma, Big Tech, etc.) or any of their well-paid media shills
  • Recognize the two-party deception for the deadly con game it is
  • Rediscover the subversive pleasure of thinking for yourself.
  • Protect your children and all children by any means necessary

(Related listening that inspired this post)

The post For kids in schools, PCBs are more common and more dangerous than guns first appeared on Dissident Voice.

What do you REALLY know about student loan forgiveness?

The debate [sic] related to student loan forgiveness is almost always based on media lies and carved-in-stone ideological identities. For example, if you see yourself as left or liberal, you salivate each time Bernie Sanders evokes the specter of 100 percent forgiveness. Conservatives reflexively grumble about “big government” and/or “work ethic” without doing any real investigation.

Hey, who needs facts when we have our [sic] manufactured opinions?

As is my style, I’m here to fill in a few of the blanks. Once again, the goal is not to change your mind. I’m just trying to increase the likelihood of having discussions founded on accuracy.

How Big is the Problem?

Never would I downplay the holistic stress of being in debt. I get it. But, for this specific issue: 18 percent of borrowers owe less than $5,000 in student loan debt. Only 6 percent of those with student debt owe more than $100,000. They make up one-third of the outstanding $1.5 trillion of debt.

It’s a problem, sure, but what about all those with medical debt or mortgages or credit card debt accrued due to the conscious destruction of our economy over the past two years?

For context:

  • Student debt has risen in the U.S. for two main reasons: more people attend college now than ever before and college tuition has increased by 169 percent since 1980. As a result, about 14 percent of all American adults report they have outstanding undergraduate student debt.
  • Although the total is much lower than student debt, roughly 50 percent of Americans carry medical debt
  • 43 million U.S. borrowers owe nearly $1.6 trillion altogether in federal student loans
  • The total home mortgage debt is about (wait for it) $10 trillion

Who decides which issues make headlines and which issues get buried by algorithms? .

Who Pays For This Gesture? 

Fourteen percent of Americans carry student loan debt. Then there’s the top 5 percent that pays ZERO taxes. That leaves about 80 percent of Americans to foot the bill while also trying to manage their finances and do more than “just get by.”

Translation: Lower- and middle-class taxpayers will bear the brunt of the student loan forgiveness stunt. Sure, it’s better than paying taxes to fund arms shipments to Neo-Nazi transhumanists in Ukraine but we don’t get to make that choice. Plus, why should we be forced to pay for either?

Side note: People who have already paid off their student debt would now be helping to pay off the student debt of others who didn’t. Where’s the “social justice” in that?

Who Does It Help?

The yearly median income of households with student loans is $76,400. Remind me: Why is this the issue that “progressives” swoon over?

Food stamps serve households with a median income of about $19,000 a year. Half of the recipients live below the poverty but the government only provides $2,300 annually for the average household.

Even if student debt forgiveness was capped at $50,000, that would send an average of $26,000 to eligible households. Meanwhile, families on food stamps would need 11 years to receive that much support. Where’s the #woke crowd on this issue?

Another group that will be helped by student loan forgiveness is colleges and universities. They can raise tuition even more now because they know the taxpayers will assume the financial burden through higher taxes. You might even call it the Academic-Industrial Complex.

This dynamic will result in fewer students being able to go to college in the future and if they try, the debt burden returns so the cycle can start again.

Why Does This Make No Sense?

It made no sense when mom-and-pop stores were shuttered while Target and Wal-Mart stayed open in 2020. It made no sense when you had to wear a mask to enter a restaurant but could take it off once you sat down.

I could go on but remember: It all makes sense to the powers that (shouldn’t) be. Everything being pushed on us is another step toward the Great Reset and other World Economic Forum goals.

In a nutshell: Their goal is to forgive all debt (especially their own, of course) and force us into a digital, cashless, social credit society in which we “own nothing” but “will be happy.”

So, please stop delegating all your energy to media-generated “debates” like student debt, guns, abortion, etc. Use some of that time to instead focus on self-education. Then, armed with knowledge, connect with others who are also dedicated to stopping the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

But if you really, really can’t stop yourself from posting about how you do or don’t support student loan forgiveness, can you please at least do a little homework to understand the damn issue? (Scroll up and re-read, for starters.)

The post What do you REALLY know about student loan forgiveness? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

Cindy Sheehan, Mickey Z. and Weird “Activist” Karma (part 1)

Mickey Z.: Recently, Cindy Sheehan and I appeared on each other’s podcasts (Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox Newsletter and Post-Woke). While talking off-air, Cindy suggested we collaborate on an article related to our experiences with the Left — particularly since March 2020. To follow is the first part of that conversation.

MZ: About a month or two ago, a subscriber to my Substack described it as a “conservative blog.” She did so while pointing out how “unexpected” it is that someone running a conservative blog also runs a one-man program to help homeless women. Strangely, I didn’t flinch or feel any need to defend or explain myself. Welcome to 2022.

For the record, I am not a conservative. I’m also not a liberal. These days, I doubt I qualify as anything traditionally “left” or “right” and I’m not sure it matters in any ideological sense. But it certainly matters in an interpersonal sense. For the crime of pointing out the lies and contradictions in the Covid narrative, I’ve lost friends and family members. And that sucks. Again, welcome to 2022.

Cindy Sheehan: I have had similar experiences with people for the past two years, as my comrade, Mickey. If I had a nickel for every time someone called me a “Trumper,” or “Proud boy,” or even the ultimate 2020’s slur: Anti-vaxxer, I’d have hundreds of nickels!

As someone who has stood fast on her principles of peace, economic equality, and working-class solidarity, for almost two decades in the public eye, I thought I had earned some caché, or that I had piled up some credits in the Cindy Sheehan Bank of Trust. But as soon as a ¡VIRUS! hit our shores with a bigger P.R. push than George W. Bush’s rush to war in Iraq, my star faded in the eyes of former friends, colleagues, and comrades, while the stars of such criminal exploiters like Trump, Biden, Fauci, and Gates (not an inclusive list) went SUPER-NOVA in their galaxy.

MZ: I hear you, Cindy, and I’ve certainly always seen you that way. Whether or not I agree with you (and I most often do!), I know where you’re coming from and I recognize the hard work you do before reaching conclusions. It’s heartbreaking to witness the divisive power of fear in action. We got more than a little taste of it after 9/11 — when I also lost friends, comrades, and family members. Since March 2020, however, the programming went nuclear and has (so far) proven more potent than decades of reputation-building, friendship, and community.

In the meantime, as you and I have mentioned on our respective podcasts, we’ve made some new allies. So, how do you see yourself building on these new connections and addressing the very urgent issues of the moment (censorship, the Great Reset, etc.) — all while sustaining your commitment to principles of peace, economic equality, and working-class solidarity?

CS: As an illustrative example, Mickey and I had a falling-out in 2016 over the presidential elections. It took Mickey reaching out this year for us to re-establish a connection. When we both realized we had the same ideas about the current situation, I know I was elated to be back in touch, but dismayed at the lost opportunity we had to work together to oppose the neo-fascism we were all experiencing. I tell this story because before the ¡VIRUS! I was very guilty of applying the “purity test” to my activist relationships.

I mean, there are times when there are chasms that cannot be crossed, but when it comes to revolutionary victory over the global ruling class, we all need to grasp the fact that no matter how loony your neighbor may appear to you — right, left, or center — we have more in common with any of them than we do with the ilk of Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos. If we continue obsessing on how anyone voted in 2016, or 2020, and making the profoundly corrupt electoral process our litmus test, we cannot even begin to address anything that is not a wedge issue (guns/abortion) like imperialism and diseased capitalism.

Where do you see we can build a movement across political divides without compromising our values?

MZ: I very much hope I finally and fully learned the purity test lesson, too! But I agree that some chasms are best left alone. Better to use that time and energy to connect with someone with whom there’s some kind of starting point. As for your question, here’s my long attempt at answering it:

Ten years ago, I was still heavily involved with Occupy Wall Street. I was at several protests, events, and demos each week — often, I was the one speaking. I gave talks on a regular basis and even led teach-ins in NYC parks. My old Facebook page was a frenzy of radical activity.

That said, I have no interest in participating in the same old virtue signaling, exhibitionist, futile “activism” now. Even if I was, the vast majority of the people I worked with back then have since rejected me. First, it was my examination of “activist” tactics. Then I dared to question the trans agenda. Finally, pandemic politics became the proverbial last straw.

So, I had to go back 20 years for inspiration. I had a huge global audience thanks to the books I was writing and my non-stop articles on sites like Z Net and Counterpunch. I even jumped on the blog bandwagon to further solidify my standing in that pre-social media world.

What I’m doing today is both similar to this and new. I’m still engaged in 24/7 self-education and relentlessly sharing what I discover. But I’ve lost most of my comrades and now, social media censors me. This led me to create a Substack and jump on the podcast bandwagon. My approach is to talk with a wide spectrum of guests on the podcast while posting about just as wide a spectrum of topics in my written posts. All of this is in the name of exposing my readers and listeners to viewpoints that would be erased on any site governed by an algorithm.

CS: It’s interesting to me, Mickey, that our experiences are essentially the same, moving through separate spaces. Is it because of who we are as humans, or how the “movements” are?

I never imagined before my son Casey was killed in Iraq in April of 2004, that I would become an activist, never mind all of the attention my activism got (Camp Casey in Crawford pre-dated the OWS movement by six years?).

I was such a noob when I decided that I would, with my sister-comrade Dede Miller (RIP), go to Crawford, Texas in August of 2005 to ask George W, Bush “What Noble Cause?” To say I was stunned at the response is an understatement. People poured into poor Crawford by the thousands, and we had many thousands of people around the world in solidarity with us. It was obnoxious how much media scrutiny I came under.

My first mistake in my “career” was thinking that everyone who came to Crawford that summer wanted the post-9/11 wars to end: Afghanistan and Iraq. I had so much support that summer that I felt blessed by the universe and I felt that we were really going to end the wars. All of my energy and positivity would come to a crashing halt though when the Democrats regained a majority in Congress and they did nothing to end the wars. So, I left the party, and more than half of my support left me. Fake-lefty online spaces like The Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Democracy Now,, TruthOut, and CommonDreams left me and dropped me like the proverbial hot potato.

By the time the ¡VIRUS! struck in 2020, I was down to a handful of really strong anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist comrades. I thought if they were still with me after I left the War Party; opposed Obama’s wars, and still held Democrats to the same standard I held the Republicans, then they would be my comrades FOR LIFE — no matter what. However, I think I lost more than half of those people to the shining examples of sacrifice and morality: the previously mentioned criminals. All of a sudden, instead of being a person of integrity and courage, I became a pariah in my own community. Ironically, the same people who castigated me for not hating Trump enough were now castigating me because I was hesitant to inject his Operation Warp Speed juice into my body.  In 2020,  then candidates Sloppy Joe Biden and Kopmala Harris are on the record as saying that they would NEVER inject something in their bodies that was propagated by Trump — until they became the neo-fascists in charge of it, then even the most ardent Trump haters lined up for their jabs. In my humble opinion, no matter how we personally feel about the Covax, it should be no one’s business what medical procedure we decide to take, or not — from vaccines to abortions.

How can we triumph over the paradigm of war and profiteering over people that we have in this country when we always have to play the “Blue No Matter Who” Game? Look where that has led us: to the brink of nuclear annihilation.

MZ: Wow, Cindy, it appears you and I have accumulated a lot of weird “activist” karma. What shadow work do we need to do? Why do we seem to be condemned to so much acceptance-then-rejection? (Personally, I’ve always related to the Cassandra myth.)

I’ve also always flinched at decades of claims that I “never offer a solution.” I even have a stock answer to this charge. Here goes: Way too many people imply that unless a critic expounds a specific strategy for change, their opinion is worthless. This reaction misses the essential role critical analysis plays in a society where problems — and their causes — are so cleverly disguised.

Perhaps it’s time for me to toss that answer into the dustbin of history and try a new approach. Perhaps it’s also time for us to make this a two-part article? Part 2 could be a discussion of possible steps to, as you say above, “build a movement across political divides without compromising our values”? Or do you wanna keep going here?

CS: Mickey and I are hoping that this contribution to the current state of activism, or lack thereof, will begin a conversation about how we can “build a movement across political divides without compromising our values.” We need everybody to stop the world’s rapid slide into all-out war and environmental devastation. We are asking for your comments, thoughts, experiences, and solutions to incorporate into Part 2 of this conversation and to begin to build the movement we need to undermine the capitalists, profiteers, and imperialists.

The post Cindy Sheehan, Mickey Z. and Weird “Activist” Karma (part 1) first appeared on Dissident Voice.

The entire culture needs to be recycled

Recently, as I neared my local C-Town supermarket, I saw a middle-aged man standing near a recycling redemption machine. In front of him were several massive clear garbage bags teeming full of the cans and bottles he had collected.

The man looked bloated, exhausted, defeated — his skin grayish as he went through the motions of securing a few bucks. He reached into one of the bags and pulled out an empty, crumpled liter-sized bottle of Coca-Cola.

My eyes happened to meet the man’s eyes just as he lifted the dirty bottle to his mouth. Without any hesitation, he wrapped his lips around the opening and blew air inside. The plastic bottle inflated to a somewhat normal size. (Apparently, the bottles need to be close to their original shape for the machine to accept them.)

I tried to hide it but he saw my grimace. With so much of the world scrubbing any exposed inch of their epidermis in a futile attempt to feel safe, this poor soul had reached an entirely different state of mind. “Taste the feeling” indeed.

There are multiple supermarkets within a 15-minute-walk radius of my apartment. The prices and selections vary. How friendly the employees are can also fluctuate. The cleanliness level is usually consistently okay. What all these establishments have in common, however, is a recycling station.

Just outside the entrance are a couple of machines at which locals can load the bottles and cans they’ve gathered. Once the metal and plastic are in the machine, the loader gets a receipt to bring to a cashier inside in exchange for “deposit” money.

Here’s how the New York Department of Environmental Conservation explains the concept:

New York’s Returnable Container Act requires at least a 5-cent deposit on carbonated soft drinks, beer and other malt beverages, mineral water, soda water, water, and wine cooler containers. A deposit is required on glass, metal, and plastic containers that hold less than one gallon or 3.78 liters.

Unfortunately, due to poverty and the ongoing popularity of unhealthy items like soda, this is a common activity. Even during the widespread fear frenzy in NYC during the pandemic, the lines at the redemption machines remained long. Concerns about the virus were easily outweighed by a desperate need for whatever income was available.

The dull-eyed man blowing into a used, germ-ridden Coke bottle was obviously not concerned about where that bottle might have been. Who touched it? What touched it? How many mouths had been on it? “Germophobia” is a luxury, I suppose.

Over the past decade or so, bottles and cans have become a form of currency in my neighborhood. I walk to a local gym each day before 6 A.M. At that time, it’s often just me and can collectors alone on the streets (excluding a few stragglers still staggering home from clubs). You can hear the collectors long before you see them. They use supermarket shopping carts to transport their “currency” and the rattling sound is both loud and unmistakable.

Some locals see them as a nuisance. Others diligently leave their cans and bottles where the collectors can easily find and access them. Just the other day, I saw a woman run after a collector with a large bag of plastic bottles. It was such a sweet interaction, it brought me to tears — of joy and sorrow.

Social media is filled with examples of such “positive news.” Don’t get me wrong, I get weepy at some of these stories, too. But it doesn’t change the fact that we mostly aim our energy at cheering individual acts of charity but rarely (if ever) point out structural and institutional indifference.

Projects like mine, for example, should not be necessary for a nation as wealthy as the U.S. But, in the Home of the Brave™, they are required and woefully insufficient. Our government is a failure for everyone below the top few percent.

Speaking of failures: “Traditional recycling is the greatest example of modern-day greenwashing,” declares Ross Polk, an investigative journalist specializing in environmental issues. “Recycling is championed as the strategy to enable a cleaner, healthier world by those businesses that have profited the most from the extractive, take-make-waste economy. In reality, it is merely a cover to continue business as usual. Corporations espouse the efficacy of recycling via hollow ‘responsibility commitments’ to avoid examination of the broader negative consequences that their products and business models have wrought. Recycling is good for one thing, though — it helps us dodge the responsibility of our rampant and unsustainable consumption.”

Polk concludes: “After nearly 50 years of existence, recycling has proven to be an utter failure at staving off environmental and social catastrophe. It neither helps cool a warming planet nor averts ecosystem destruction and biodiversity loss.”

He could’ve added that recycling is also not a moral or effective way of helping poor people achieve any sense of financial security. The business of recycling is a facade. Any belief that redeeming cans and bottles will help individuals “get by” is equally as deceitful and self-serving as the recycling scam itself.

We’ve spent much of the past two years fearing each other, dreading the act of breathing itself. We went months without seeing smiles, depriving loved ones of hugs, starving children of valuable and necessary non-verbal social input, and viciously turning on anyone who does not march in strict lockstep with the algorithm-induced views.

Some might say the dull-eyed man at the redemption machine has sunk to a different level. In many ways and for many reasons, he certainly has. I might suggest that he’s also transcended some of what passes for normal.

Trust me, this is not some misguided fantasy that the poverty-stricken have it “better.” I’m not Mother Teresa who once despicably stated: “I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.” My supposition is merely a musing about letting go of the illusion of control and “order.”

If only we could recycle the entire damn culture and start over.

The post The entire culture needs to be recycled first appeared on Dissident Voice.

Bernie and AOC = Playing the role of “anti-war”

Above is a screenshot of a self-righteous Bernie Sanders tweet from April 2012.

And here’s what the anti-war [sic] icon said the other day as he voted to send $40 billion of your money to support the war efforts of Neo-Nazis and transhumanists in Ukraine:

“We should always have a debate, but the problem is that Ukraine is in the middle of a very intense war right now. I think every day counts, and I think we have to respond as strongly and vigorously as we can.”

[insert sad trombone here)

AOC, another infamous radical [sic] socialist [sic] firebrand [sic], also voted to fund the war but she didn’t even bother to issue a press release. Above is a tweet of hers from early 2020.

Reminder: The powers that shouldn’t be are relying on YOU to continue supporting the two-party deception.

The post Bernie and AOC = Playing the role of “anti-war” first appeared on Dissident Voice.

Watch Me as I “Follow the Science”

A list of specious scientific achievements (sic) would be long enough to warrant a ten-part Netflix series. It includes, for example, the Tuskegee Study, mercury fillings, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), veal crates, electroshock therapy, napalm, mustard gas, automatic weapons, sonic weaponry, directed energy weapons, weapons in general, surgical experiments (without anesthesia) on slaves, deforestation, Vioxx, DDT, eugenics, GMOs, fossil fuels, the Milgram experiments, factory farming, the medicalization of the birthing process, vivisection, mountaintop mining, MK ULTRA, conversion therapy, forced sterilizations, pre-frontal lobotomies, waterboarding, deep-sea bottom trawling, Accutane, land mines, and the electric chair— to name but a few of the innumerable options.

And I haven’t yet mentioned television, cellphones, automobiles (and automobile culture), the Internet, social media, and artificial intelligence!

If you’ve fallen in love with scientists, by all means, please allow me to introduce you to Chester M. Southam. In 1952, he injected unknowing inmates at the Ohio State Prison with live cancer cells. Eleven years later, he did the same to 22 elderly patients at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital in Brooklyn. Why would a man of science do such a thing? Simple, he wanted to “discover the secret of how healthy bodies fight the invasion of malignant cells.” Despite a cover-up, Southam’s atrocities were exposed and he was given the harsh punishment of (wait for it) one-year probation. By the late 1960s, the American Cancer Society elected him their vice president.

The because-science hive mind should also be enamored with University of Iowa researchers Wendell Johnson and Mary Tudor — creators of what is now known as the “Monster Study.” In 1939, Johnson and Tudor conducted an experiment on 22 orphan children. One group was given positive speech therapy. The others got negative speech therapy. Using science as their guide, the researchers left the negative group with speech problems they retained for the rest of their lives.

Who doesn’t appreciate the doubly dubious intersection of science and the military? A fine example occurred in 1956 and 1957 when the U.S. Army released millions of infected mosquitos into the cities of Savannah, Georgia, and Avon Park, Florida. Their “scientific” goal was to see if the insects would spread dengue fever and yellow fever — and what a success! Hundreds of unknowing civilians presented with symptoms like respiratory problems, stillbirths, fevers, encephalitis, typhoid, and death.

And, if science is your fetish, you’ll certainly love what researchers at Harvard University did in the late 1940s. They tested diethylstilbestrol, a synthetic estrogen, on pregnant women — without their knowledge — at the Lying-In Hospital of the University of Chicago. This scientific wizardry resulted in an abnormally high number of miscarriages and babies with low birth weight. But, hey, to question the white lab coats responsible would be tantamount to ignorance, right?

I can already hear all the knee-jerk complaints about how I’m conveniently ignoring the myriad benefits of science. Let’s be clear: You don’t need me or anyone else to laud scientific accomplishments. That already happens, 24/7, across all forms of media, in textbooks, and in everyday conversation.

What we do need is some context and balance — before it’s too late.

The post Watch Me as I “Follow the Science” first appeared on Dissident Voice.

What’s missing from the gun debate [sic]?

The shooting in Buffalo has once again ignited an ill-informed “debate” on the topic of guns. Thus, I feel compelled to re-share some of the missing context. 

Male Violence (as usual) Must Be Factored In

Please allow me to introduce some damn good reasons to consider some kind of gun control:

  • On average, 57 women are shot and killed by an intimate partner every month in the United States
  • Over half of female victims of intimate partner homicide in the U.S. are killed with a gun
  • Over the ten-year period between 2008 and 2017, there was a reduction in intimate partner homicides of women involving weapons — except homicides by guns, which increased by 15 percent
  • When you factor in attempted murders using guns, nearly 1 million women in the Home of the Brave™ have survived being shot or shot at by an intimate partner

Translation: Male violence remains the world’s number one problem and the omnipresence of guns makes it easier for men to commit their violent acts. The common denominator of mass shooters is not their whiteness. It’s their male-ness.

Don’t Trust Your News Feed, part 1

Unless you do a little digging, it would be easy to believe that the United States is the gun death capital of the world. Clickbait headlines, news feed posts, and conversations based on emotion distract from the fact that the U.S. has the 32nd-highest rate of deaths from gun violence in the world: 3.96 deaths per 100,000 people.

In 2019, there were 37,200 reported deaths by firearm in the Land of the Free™. Is that 37,200 too many? Of course, it is. Is it comparable to, say, Guatemala, Venezuela, or El Salvador? I suppose that depends on your definition of “comparable,” but the rate per 100,000 in El Salvador is 36.78.

Crash Course

Meanwhile, more than 38,000 people die every single year in crashes on U.S. roadways. An additional 4.5 million (on average) are injured seriously enough to require medical attention. Road crashes are the leading cause of death in the U.S. for people 54 and under — an average of 102 per day. (Context: About 500 Americans are killed per year by rifles.)

Let’s be clear, I’m not comparing guns to cars. But I am comparing the media coverage, public perception, and psychological manipulation. Where are the rallies and petitions related to 100 Americans needlessly dying per day in road crashes? Where’s the outrage and the legislation and the campaign speeches and the Time Magazine covers for the lives lost to the car culture? Why do we hear about mothers fearing their sons won’t come home because a cop might shoot him when, in reality, she should be WAY more nervous about him getting into a car?

We’ve just spent two-plus years allegedly trying to keep people “safe” from a virus with a fatality rate that Lord Fauci himself says “may be considerably less than 1%.” But, if widespread safety and risk avoidance is our collective (but futile) aim, why are we still manufacturing vehicles that can attain speeds higher than, say, 30 MPH? Why is the speed limit so damn high when we all know that the fatality rate rises with a vehicle’s speed?

Think about it: We’re obsessed with things like Covid and guns but yet we still ingest carcinogens, use toxic chemicals, and drive our death machines at dangerous speeds. If the powers-that-shouldn’t-be really gave a shit about us, they would’ve taken action to stop all of that and more. Instead, we’re being divided over flawed mitigation tactics, lethal medical protocols, and manipulated statistics.

Back to my point: The U.S. gun fatality rate is much lower than advertised while a worse problem — road crash fatalities — is barely ever mentioned. But, that’s not it. I have one more major component of the gun debate that is tragically omitted by just about everyone.

Don’t Trust Your News Feed, part 2

A small number of gun-related deaths in the U.S. can be chalked up to accidents, law enforcement incidents, and other undetermined circumstances. Roughly four in ten gun-related deaths are murders. Wait… what? Yep, when we get the numbers recited to us in the name of headlines and fear-mongering, a pretty important detail is always left out: 60 percent of annual gun-related deaths in God’s Country™ are suicides. About 24,000 per year — out of about 45,000 overall per year. Let that sink in.

Please allow me to address the statistical manipulation at work. If you subtract gun deaths related to suicide and accidents, the annual gun-related murder rate drops to about 13,000 per year. Is that 13,000 too many? Of course, it is. Is it anywhere near the death rates of cancer, heart disease, suicide, or road crashes? Nope. Why are we fixated on guns when, for example, medical error is at least the third leading cause of death in the U.S. — taking anywhere from 250,000 to one million lives per year?

Fact: Doctors are far, far more dangerous than any AR-15.

A Culture in Crisis

Finally, here is my primary point: If “we’re all in this together,” why do we patently ignore the rising suicide rate? While we squabble over which lives matter or not, suicide is now the twelfth leading cause of death in the U.S. For those between the ages of 35 and 54, it is the fourth leading cause. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among individuals between 10 and 34. Suicides outnumber homicides in the U.S. by more than 2 to 1. Since 2001, the suicide rate in America has increased by 31 percent.

Gun control won’t stop this trend. Gene therapies disguised as vaccinations won’t protect us from a culture steeped in despair and division. Marches and protests remain as impotent as ever. We like to pretend that “our way of life” is so exemplary. Meanwhile, more and more of us are choosing death over it. The solutions must be more foundational and compassionate than the so-called debates we’ve been programmed to embrace.

When pondering hot button “issues” like gun control, I urge you to NOT surrender your capacity for critical thought. Do your own research. Make up your own mind. On a much deeper level: Collectively, we are a culture in crisis and our problems run far deeper than the current gun control debate (sic) allows. It’s long overdue that we recognize the desperate imperative to do much more than “win” a Twitter debate. Let’s choose to connect rather than compete.

The post What’s missing from the gun debate [sic]? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

New World Health Organization/Order?

As you may have heard, members of the World Health [sic] Organization (WHO) are voting on an international pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations between May 22 and 28, 2022.

Click here to read those proposed amendments.

The good folks at Reclaim the Net flesh things out really well here.

To sum up, the pandemic treaty would supersede 194 member nations’ sovereignty in areas like:

  • International vaccine passports and contact tracing
  • Addressing “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “too much information”
  • Global surveillance and data sharing
  • Increased WHO powers to declare health emergencies and/or “potential” emergencies and thus control what you can or cannot do in such an “emergency”

FYI: The two largest funders of the WHO are the United States and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

If the idea of bowing down to unelected technocrats controlling virtually every aspect of your life doesn’t send a chill down your spine, you can go back to scrolling news updates about Ukraine, leaked [sic] Supreme Court memos, and monkeypox.

The post New World Health Organization/Order? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

Hey Elon Musk, I want my cut of Twitter!

I’m getting a genuine kick out of watching the so-called Left panic about the possibility of free speech ever happening on social media. But… this does not mean I support Elon Musk — a transhumanist parasite hellbent on constructing a control grid for the elites, e.g.

  • Tesla helps create a proliferation of electric cars which allows the powers that shouldn’t be to manage where we go, when, and how far
  • Twitter is a massive wellspring of data voluntarily offered up by a compliant population
  • Neuralink takes data collection to the whole level of data extraction and replacement
  • SpaceX supplies the satellites to keep all of this madness running

Fact: Support for Elon Musk is tantamount to global Stockholm Syndrome.

But that’s not the primary topic of this article. I’d rather point out how predators like Musk are never “self-made.”

I could detour into the mythology he’s created about his childhood. This despite the fact that his father, Errol Musk once said, “We had so much money at times we couldn’t even close our safe.” And then there’s the infamous emerald mine, purchased in the mid-1980s, which helped to fund his family’s lavish lifestyle of “yachts, skiing holidays, and expensive computers.”

But I’d rather focus on Musk being the latest of a long line of Robber Barons who amass obscene wealth thanks to America’s immoral hybrid system of capitalist socialism. The costs of research and development are always socialized. The profits, of course, are always privatized.

For example:

In January 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy issued a $465 million loan to Tesla Motors to produce specially designed, all-electric plug-in vehicles and to develop a manufacturing facility in Fremont, California to produce battery packs, electric motors, and other powertrain components for powering specially designed all-electric vehicles.

In September 2014, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval signed a package of bills to provide $1.3 billion in tax breaks and other incentives for Tesla Motors, putting a bow on the deal for the electric car company to build a massive factory in the state.

A few more examples for your edification:

  • 2014: SpaceX received $15 million from the state of Texas
  • 2015: Tesla had sold $517 million in environmental credits to competitors per a federal mandate. Tax credits for consumers also helped them sell more cars.
  • 2015: SolarCity receives $497.5 million in grants, in addition to tax credits.
  • 2016: New York State put $750 million toward a SolarCity plant in Buffalo, NY.
  • 2020: Tesla accepts “certain payroll benefits” from the federal government’s $600 billion pandemic stimulus.
  • 2020: SpaceX signs a $653 million contract with the U.S. Air Force.
  • 2021: SpaceX lands a $2.89 billion contract with NASA.

The way I see it, so many U.S. tax dollars went into Musk’s “self-made” success that we plebeians technically own a cut of that cesspool known as Twitter. I want my share now!

U.S. billionaires (especially Elon Musk) got 62 percent richer during the “pandemic.” More specifically, the 400 richest Americans added $4.5 trillion to their wealth — an increase of 40 percent. Let’s pull back to a bigger picture:

  • Over the past 40 years, the richest 1% of Americans saw their wealth increase by $21 trillion dollars. Meanwhile, U.S. households in the bottom 50% experienced a $900 billion loss in personal net worth.
  • Since 1978, the wages of corporate CEOs rose by 900% while U.S. workers only saw their average wages rise by 12%.
  • The 10 richest people in the world right now are worth more than the combined economies of the poorest 85 countries.

Reminder: There are no “self-made” billionaires. They acquire their fortunes on the backs of the non-rich and via the devastation of the ecosystem and natural resources.

As Che Guevara said more than six decades ago:

The amount of poverty and suffering required for a Rockefeller to emerge, and the amount of depravity entailed in the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible for the popular forces to expose this clearly.

— Che Guevara, Socialism and man in Cuba, March 1965 (First Published: March 12, 1965, as From Algiers, for Marcha . The Cuban Revolution Today)

Breaking news: The popular forces now have the tools to expose much of this clearly.

Suggestion: Let’s get busy doing that rather than worshipping the criminals who seek to control, impoverish, enslave, and dehumanize us. The choice, as always, is yours.

The post Hey Elon Musk, I want my cut of Twitter! first appeared on Dissident Voice.

Henry Kissinger, the World Economic Forum and Population Control

Henry Kissinger and Klaus Schwab in Davos.

If for some inexplicable reason, you couldn’t come up with a reason to be ashamed of the U.S., I’ve got one for you: Henry Kissinger has been a widely revered thinker and statesman for six decades, and is the recipient of awards like the Nobel Peace Prize (1973); Presidential Medal of Freedom (1977); and Medal of Liberty (1986).

I may soon write a long article to document at least some of Kissinger’s heinous catalog of criminality. For now, I’d simply like to clarify his ongoing role as a Godfather of sorts to all the other miscreants that make up the top 1%.

I mean, the esteemed HK has his own damn page on the World Economic Forum (WEF) website and has been mentoring the notorious Klaus Schwab for decades. In the photo up top, Kissinger and Schwab openly plot for us to “have nothing” and “be happy.”

Kissinger’s interests have heavily influenced the parasites-in-charge (regardless of political party). As far back as 1974, he penned National Security Study Memorandum 200 on “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” In that document, the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate muses about “technological innovations” that might reduce the globe’s human population.

Kissinger has also declared: “Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the Third World, because the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”

This brings us to Bill Gates — yet another psychopath who cavorts and contrives with the murderous Henry K and his WEF cronies. Gates might see himself as up to the task of providing Kissinger with the “technological innovations” that might reduce the globe’s human population:

Click here to see and hear Gates saying these words, in case you think it’s a misquote.

I’ve told you about deadly protocols imposed on U.S. hospitals that killed about one million people. I’ve been telling you about all the vaccine adverse events that are being ignored while countless suffer and die. The sociopaths-in-charge have left a clear, easy-to-find paper trail of their intentions. What are you gonna do about all this?

P.S. I know I said I’d save all the Kissinger evidence for its own article but I can’t resist offering one example of the kind of man who is awarded a peace prize in today’s society:

With a total population of nearly 30 million, the Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world without their own country and have often been used as geopolitical pawns. In 1975, in the midst of a border dispute between Iraq and the Shah of Iran (a U.S. ally), then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger secretly channeled $16 million in military aid to Iraqi Kurds.

The Kurds, succumbing to the spin, believed Washington was finally supporting their right to self-determination. In reality, the United States was using the Kurdish rebels to sap the resources of the Iraqi regime and coerce them into a settlement.

That settlement came at the 1975 OPEC summit, at which time the United States promised Iraq that support for the Kurds would be immediately withdrawn. As Iraq wiped out the Kurdish rebels, Kurdish leader Mustafa Barzani sent a message to Kissinger. It read in part:

“Our movement and people are being destroyed in an unbelievable way, with silence from everyone. We feel, your excellency, that the United States has a moral and political responsibility towards our people, who have committed themselves to your country’s policy.”

One can easily imagine Kissinger getting off on being called “your excellency,” while cringing at the concept of “moral responsibility,” but he did not directly reply to Barzani. Instead, he instructed a staff member: “Promise them anything, give them what they get, and fuck them if they can’t take a joke.”

When asked to explain America’s duplicity towards the Kurds, Kissinger delivered a one-liner that effectively sums up his beliefs and U.S. foreign policy: “Covert action should not be confused with missionary work.”

The post Henry Kissinger, the World Economic Forum and Population Control first appeared on Dissident Voice.