Strategizing The People’s Playbook

The 5th Generation Warfare is vast. And you’re not schooled in it.

You’re up against politicians that don’t give a damn about you. Armies of lawyers, lobbyists and PR agents who operate the corporate side. Data analysts and psychological operations experts working full time in the fusion centers and intelligence agencies to sway your mind. Not to mention occult magicians doing some sort of dark work that aids in this in various ways!

What is a person to do about all that?

Instilling demotivation, apathy and hopelessness against your enemy are always part of the art of war. 

There are many fronts in the global war. The ones that come to mind:

• Culture
• Economics
• Healthcare
• Legal
• Political
• Spiritual
• Psychological
• Media
• Environmental
• Physical/Kinetic
• Cyber

In most cases these will be mixed and matched. For example, there could be a legal fight regarding healthcare, where opinions are shaped on way or another in cyberspace, with the psychology and spirit of all involved.

What we’re up against is vast. No one person can do much against all of it. The good news is that is not your mission. But you may be able to do something against SOME small piece of it.

First, let’s look at the big picture. As I’ve said before, the hard part about this war, is most people don’t even realize they’re in it, nor what they’re fighting against or for!

The Inhuman Agenda

There is what I like to call the inhuman agenda aiming at total enslavement of humanity. It is inhuman in that it goes against the principles of humanism. And it is inhuman in that, I believe, what drives it comes from dark forces beyond mere humans.

To overly simplify the inhuman agenda we can look at it’s technocratic aims. These are easy to see as they’re all talked about openly, with many steps already made towards them.

The overall technocratic agenda involves having a digital ID that is tied into CBDC’s (central banker digital currency), vaccine passport, a social credit score and a carbon credit score. That gives the controllers damn near near total control because of the ability to steer and even shut down the economic life of each individual person.

There is clear evidence that all of that is in play. In the words of H.G. Wells, it’s an “open conspiracy”. If you need the facts surrounding this, I’d point you to Pseudo Pandemic by Iain Davis as a good primer on virtually all these subjects.

(The agendas of depopulation and transhumanism are related but can be seen as somewhat separate from these so won’t be addressed here.)

Understand that getting this “digital prison” put in place is for the technocratic elite to win the war.

All this to say that dismantling the pieces of this plan is required by the people, for them to win.

Leverage and Weak Spots

Not only MUST the battles be waged here, but in some ways it is quite nice that they are. By that I mean because we have leverage against these specific points in that very few people want these things at all.

The majority of people believe in something called rights, to bodily autonomy, to privacy, etc., that stand in stark contrast to vaccine passports, social credit scores and the like.

A few centuries of talking and striving for inalienable rights, even when falling far short of such ideals, have led many to desire more freedom not less.

It takes a LOT of propaganda to make people willing slaves, especially on that level. The accelerated push towards these even more inhuman things makes such propaganda seen for what it is by more and more.

Witness the facts that very few people are getting the COVID boosters at this point, or shooting up mRNA into their little children, despite the biggest worldwide psychological campaign ever.

Therefore, it is actually easier to fight against some of these things than certain other issues. There is leverage in some of these fronts.

Defense and Offense

The inhuman agenda is a game of inches. These technocratic forces have power and are willing to do what has been called the totalitarian march. This always involves going two steps forward, one step back. Floating trial balloons, observing and adapting from there.

When there is pushback from people, they cool their jets. They look for a side-door entry in. Often times they bide their time until later, until the next emergency allows them to ram something through.

Technocracy has been talked about for over one hundred years. Such powers have been patient in moving this plan forward.

Therefore, we need to not only push-back but reclaim lost ground.

For example, not just defeat bills that allow would kids to get vaccinated against parental consent as happened in California recently, but to pass bills that make mandatory vaccination illegal or use of vaccine passports illegal.

The latter is what I’m calling going on the offense.

Because their offense is non-stop. California just signed into law that if any doctor dares commit Covid heresy that doesn’t recognize the scientism-dogma they can be excommunicated.

I mentioned this a little bit in Strategic Relocation. Such battles are much more likely to be won in certain jurisdictions over others.

The WHO aims now to gain control over and above sovereignty of nations. This is being fought as must be done. And a greater step of building laws and structures that overrule the WHO’s demands is also required.

Defense and offense means to withdraw economic support from anyone that furthers or supports the inhuman agenda, and to support those that oppose it. Witness the closing of Paypal accounts by many after their $2500 fine for misinformation policy.

Much more on these topics in future People’s Playbook articles.

Picking a Battle Front

You must choose your front(s) wisely.

Like in real war, be wary of trying to fight on too many fronts at once! Spreading your resources too thin is a good way to lose ground.

Your resources include:

1. Your Time
2. Your Attention
3. Your Money
4. Your Efforts
5. Your Network
6. Your Organizations

What can you actually do?

Where can you lend a hand?

What specific area calls out to you most of all?

What place is of high leverage that more people need to rally around and attack?

Sometimes it is not you that does the choosing, but the front chooses you. Like those who watch their loved ones become vaccine-injured or even die. A very unfortunate calling, but a calling nonetheless.

I got into health for a variety of reasons. My businesses are involved in the space. Therefore, it makes sense for me to focus on that space, which is why I have.

I plan to continue to focus my efforts specifically on the battlefront of mandatory vaccines and vaccine passports. I think this is the highest leverage spot where the tide of war is turning in that public opinion is failing. Not only against the COVID vaccine, but the entire corrupt vaccine industry to a lesser but significant degree.

They’re propping it up with everything they can, so the powers that be still control the narrative, but it is falling apart. More outright censorship is needed to hold the information battlefront line.

It is my opinion that if one area like this, just one area, where fraud has taken place for over a century can be beaten, then the whole house of cards will begin to come down.

Now’s the time for a continued strong defense and even more offense.

Parallel Systems

Building parallel societies and systems covers a whole range of other ways to go on the offense. Not just retaking lost ground, but this can be thought of as basically creating more and better resources for the war effort.

To is to increasingly fight FOR something, not just against.

For what? Again I list…

• Culture
• Economics
• Healthcare
• Legal
• Political
• Spiritual
• Psychological
• Media
• Environmental
• Physical/Kinetic
• Cyber

As all current systems are corrupted, new systems that are not corrupt, and better yet built towards an ideal of incorruptibility are crucial.

This wisdom of Buckminster Fuller applies here.

Though, as should be clear from what I’ve written so far, since we are at war, fighting against the old system IS necessary in my opinion. If nothing else, it gives us more time to create the new systems. But fighting can’t be the only thing.

Some may choose to fight more. Some may choose to build more. Some will do both.

Understand that we can’t simply beat the inhuman agenda, with a void to fill its space. It will always keep coming back, that is at least until much better systems, much more human, are in place.

Next I want to cover a few other battlefronts that have my attention…

Child Abuse Battlefront

The Jeffrey Epstein saga gripped my attention. For whatever reason it hooked me in and led me into a deep exploration of what it all meant. This led me into understanding the sick roles of child abuse, sex trafficking and blackmail as part of our corrupted systems.

This involves the darkest parts of humanity which causes most to look away and pretend it doesn’t exist. That is cowardice hidden at the subconscious level.

Because this is a part of the twisted power elite system, this front too must be dismantled to win the war. More awareness is growing, though it does seem a harder front to win.

While I am constantly learning about this topic and contribute monthly to Operation Underground Railroad, I am not clear on the best next steps to take on this front. I have faith that more clear actions will make themselves known in the future to me.

Economic Battlefront

Following the money was an important strategy in understanding our health and medicine systems. After exploring this for a long time, I realized I needed to understand money and economics, including the corruption in these systems much better.

As money drives all other systems, it is good to gain a foundation of understanding such. Without such a foundation, I would argue, it’s easier to be led astray in any other front for a variety of reasons.

There’s also the fascinating technology of cryptocurrency. CBDC’s are something to fight against because of the increased control in the hands of the technocratic elite.

On the flip side, there’s a good case for decentralized technology such as Bitcoin, Monero, etc. to actually support the people too. However, these being digital, we must be wary of how even seemingly useful systems could end up aiding in building the “digital prison”.

Many future articles will cover the economics of the People’s Playbook. After all, war is expensive! And money flows are a big part of the supply lines of 5th Generation Warfare.

Woke Battlefront

Are we really arguing about whether men can get pregnant or not?

Apparently…

From Critical Race Theory to pushing irreversible hormonal treatments and surgeries onto children, this area certainly garners a LOT of attention in the culture wars.

And it is my opinion that most of it is misdirection. Not that it isn’t important at all, but it pulls time, energy, effort, attention and intention away from the other things that are quite a bit more important.

Wasting breath going up against racist anti-racists stops people from seeing the digital prison that is coming. Unfortunately, these fights must be fought, primarily in schools if you don’t want to see children indoctrinated in this way.

The Meta Battlefront

No. I’m not talking about Facebook, though that certainly could be considered a battlefront all on its own.

I’m talking about “meta” as meaning over and above. What are the systems, structures, ideas that apply across all domains?

Like the structure behind practicing or habits, I’ve always been interested in looking across contexts. This is a strength of mine.

Ultimately, it is this meta-front that has me writing the People’s Playbook.

Can the same methods apply to fighting against vaccine passports, CBDC’s, child sex trafficking, and fighting for food sovereignty, health sovereignty and more? Absolutely.

This article has been something of the philosophy, or meta-strategy, behind the People’s Playbook. I wrote it for my own clarity but hope you have found it useful.

As typical, I’ll leave off with a question for you…

What is your main front in this war?

Incentivize More Whistleblowers to Do the Right Thing

Donald Soeken conducted a study with 233 whistleblowers in government and the private sector. He found:

• 90% of the whistleblowers were fired or demoted
• 27% had lawsuits brought against them
• 26% sought psychiatric or physical care
• 17% lost their homes
• 15% got divorced
• 10% attempted suicide
• 8% were bankrupted

And yet only 16% said they wouldn’t do it again. But maybe it’s because these ones got through it…

A NY Times article covering this 1987 study stated, “Mr. Soeken said there are seven stages of life for the whistle blower: discovery of the abuse; reflection on what action to take; confrontation with superiors; retaliation; the long haul of legal or other action involved; termination of the case, and going on to a new life.”

Few make it to the last stage. In other words, whistleblowers go through hell.

While we know of quite a few successful cases, how many are effectively stamped out by such actions?

In The Tobacco Playbook I share the story of tobacco executive and scientist Jeffrey Wigand, which was also featured in the blockbuster movie, The Insider. He went through death threats, a coordinated media smear campaign, and legal actions against him. He stood strong and weathered all the attacks, so we know his story.

That all was decades ago.

Do you think the powerful have gotten better or worse at dissuading and stopping whistleblowers since that time?

How many whistleblowers don’t we know?

“Someone would talk” if 9/11 wasn’t what the officials said it was, right? Well, have you even ever heard the names of the whistleblowers Kevin Ryan, Cate Jenkins, Barry Jennings, Michael Springmann, William Rodriguez, and more?

Unless you’ve studied the subject, then of course not.

How many whistleblowers where the smears are more successful in controlling the narrative? How many whistleblowers are simply kept out of the mainstream media?

Whistleblowers may be the most devastating enemy of those in power. All the more reason for the powerful to use every tool possible to keep them quiet.

All the more reason for you and I, the people, to look at what they’re saying. And not only that, but support their courageous decisions to blow the whistle, standing up against power and abuse.

How do we do that?

These days, many whistleblowers are often going to Project Veritas to tell their stories. In addition to building a large following despite the smears and censorship, there is something else great that Project Veritas does. That is they help the people to support the whistleblowers directly through donations.

Every whistleblower has a campaign setup to accept donations. I personally have been financially supporting those that comes forth. Why? Because, as the stats show, almost every one of them loses their job for it at the very least.

The amounts I give are small, but lots of small donations really add up. Money is what keeps most locked into doing something they don’t want to do. It too often buys silence. Therefore, donations form the safety net, so that losing your job might not be so bad.

Before diving deeper into that there are some important things to recognize about whistleblowers today.

If what the whistleblower says matches the ideology of the news and forwards certain agendas, they will be giving mainstream media coverage. The whistleblower will be held up as a moral and courageous individual by the narrative. 

If what the whistleblower says does not match the ideology of the news and stands in the way of certain agendas, they will be ignored if the threat is small enough or smeared if the threat is big enough. The full industry playbook can and will be thrown at them.

Knowing this, whistleblower’s treatment by the media gives you a very useful clue.

Julian Assange does not fit the classic definition of a whistleblower. However, WikiLeaks was a platform through which the whistle was blown, by people such as Bradley Manning (now Chelsea). Look at Assange’s treatment, from the rape allegations to the torturous imprisonment. Look at the media smearing him with all sorts of labels. Look at Manning’s treatment as well.

Contrast this to recent Facebook whistleblower, Frances Haugen, who gets the limelight. She’s on a big 60 Minutes piece. The media and politicians fawning over her. Why? Even if she legitimately believes what she is saying, which is very much possible, it helps move forward the agenda of greater censorship.

Compare her treatment to that of that of a Facebook whistleblower from just a few months prior, that Project Veritas helped leak. Data technician Morgan Kahmann leaked internal documents that showed Facebooks experiments to “Drastically reduce user exposure to vaccine hesitancy (VH) in comments”.

Did this Facebook whistleblower get any news coverage? A little bit on Fox, but not a peep anywhere else mainstream. Not surprisingly, he did get fired from Facebook for it.

Yet a total of $508,831 was raised for Morgan Kahmann. He wrote on the donation website:

“Throughout history, truth-tellers have received a lot of blowback. I knew this, yet could not sit idly by while Facebook enacted these Orwellian measures on its users. Due to my willingness to expose the truth about Facebook’s secret censorship of vaccine concerns, I have been let go from my job. I have a wife who is 7 months pregnant and a son who is 2 years old—we would appreciate any support you are able to offer at this time.”

By the way, the website GiveSendGo.com was used for most of this. They’re a Christian based funding website. Most importantly, they haven’t been removing fundraisers, censoring them, like the more well-known platform GoFundMe has done, such as with the Canadian Freedom Convoy.

This censorship playbook keeps evolving too! There was another whistleblower, this time from Pfizer, that leaked internal documents showing the company lied about using fetal tissues in development of their COVID vaccine, despite all their PR about being completely transparent.

This whistleblower, Pfizer Senior Director of Worldwide Research Vanessa Gelman, also came out with Project Veritas. She was fired for doing so. Not a peep about her on mainstream media.

A GiveSendGo campaign for her was created as well.

Twitter went so far as to slap a “possible spammy or unsafe” warning label on the link.

As censorship ramps up further, this fight may become even more difficult. Censorship resistant money, such as some forms of cryptocurrency, might become even more important.

Project Veritas is not the only one’s helping people blow the whistle but may be the biggest ones doing so actively today.

The Informed Consent Action Network is doing much the same. They have similarly helped people to support the whistleblowers that come forward, such as a nurse that gave insider details on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). She’s lost her job as well.

What I’m calling the “Whistleblower’s Safety Net” needs two things. First of all, this needs more people to chip in. Even just a couple bucks can really add up when that comes from many different people. It will make a difference for these people, which sends a message to other would-be whistleblowers.

Essentially, we can collectively say, “Do the right thing, we’ve got your back.”

Another example of this is Steve Kirsch, who has tried to incentivize people from the CDC and FDA to come forward out of his own pocket.

Secondly, this idea needs propagation. Spread the channels that support whistleblowers that fight for the people (not for the tyrants).

Spread the idea of supporting those whistleblowers to help other’s in becoming part of the safety net.

Part 3 of 3 part mini-series on Supporting Independent Media as part of the People’s Playbook

Last time I covered all the Substack sources I follow. In this message I’ll share who I follow from other sources, using the principles I covered in the first part.

Interwoven throughout this will be a discussion of how to support independent media in a variety of ways that these people and platforms utilize.

My Top Intel Sources

For longtime readers, many of these sources will be familiar as I used their work in many of my pandemic writings.

Solari Report with Catherine Austin Fitts

I would rank this as my top source of intel. Funnily enough, I was recommended it originally by a customer of mine that happened to work in military intelligence previously. Fitts was a former  United States Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Housing during the Presidency of George H.W. Bush. She was an insider, that through a series of events because she didn’t play ball, got pushed out. She is great at bringing the big picture of corruption together, with a big focus on economics since that is a huge piece of the puzzle.

Here website is run as a membership site. There is the digital option but also the print option where the quarterly Solari Report is delivered. I devour each issue as soon as it arrives. In addition to the quarterly and yearly wrap-ups, there are videos every week. Some content is available for free.

The Highwire

I first heard of Del Bigtree when he spoke at a health conference, I attended many years ago. I’ve since found his show, which I listen to as a podcast regularly, to be some of the best data on the subject. It is focused first and foremost on vaccines but touches on related subjects.

In addition to being journalists, they’re seeking to “make the news” in that they partner with lawyers that bring suits against medical corruption and our captured agencies.

Behind this news show is the non-profit charity organization Informed Consent Action Network, or ICAN. I donate on a monthly basis to this cause. These funds go to producing the weekly show as well as the legal action they take. I’ll talk more about how charities such as this play into the People’s Playbook another time.

Children’s Health Defense

The other big player in the vaccine debate that I follow is Children’s Health Defense, run by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. They also cover environmental issues, EMF’s and the like. The website is rich with detailed articles and their newsletter, The Defender, is worth signing up for.

Children’s Health Defense is also a non-profit charity organization, one that I donate to monthly.

They’ve also recently got into the book publishing business as well. RFK Jr’s. The Real Anthony Fauci was the top selling book across the USA for some time, without any institutional support.

Unlimited Hangout with Whitney Webb

Whitney Webb is one of my favorite investigative journalists that I donate too, just because her work is so good. Her website is named after the inverse of the limited hangout concept I covered in the first part of this series. Both the articles there and her podcast are phenomenal.

I originally found her work when learning about Jeffrey Epstein. On that note I’m anxiously awaiting the arrival of her just released two volume book One Nation Under Blackmail, that covers not only Epstein but the history of such operations.

We Are Change with Luke Rudkowski

Luke Rudkowski made a name for himself by getting in the faces of the elite and asking hard questions such as Henry Kissenger, Dick Cheney and more. He even went to Epstein’s Island.

Mostly he does an almost daily show of about 10-15 minutes that covers the headlines of the outrageous stuff going on.

He also operates a membership site which includes a second daily show, a forum and other useful stuff. He’s also got the biggest selection of shirts with a statement I’ve ever seen which is constantly growing too.

The Corbett Report

James Corbett has been doing independent news for a long time now. I greatly admire the depth of references he’ll put on every single video. His long form videos are scripted out, but then include references for every tiny bit. It’s how news ought to be done.

He offers a membership which is really pretty much just a donation. There are also DVD’s and a new offering, Mass Media: A History, which would be useful as a crash course for anyone wanting to understand how media works. And some of his other free documentaries are great starting points for the other side of history too.

Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying/DarkHorse Podcast

They are mainstream adjacent. But I find it useful to view people slowly wake-up to the level of corruption in our society.

They have a Patreon which includes a Discord with Q&A. The podcast also features advertising. Just by watching or listening you help their numbers which pays them to put out their show.

Project Veritas

This is a great place in that they make news in the way of being a great outlet for true whistleblowers, hidden recordings and more. A lot of big stories come out of Project Veritas these days.

They’re a charity organization that is funded fully by donations. James O’Keefe has also written a number of books. I read American Muckraker which I found quite interesting.

Some Additional Points

Now, all these people are “conspiracy theorists.” All would be labelled right wing, even though several were die-hard democrats and liberals at an earlier point.

How is this parallax? Well, after all my digging, I’m not interested in following any mainstream viewpoints that are easily seen to be propaganda. I still follow some mainstream adjacent. In either case, since many of these cover the craziness of the mainstream, that still comes through.

You might be asking where do I find the time to follow all of this? Speed reading, and watching videos/listening to podcasts at 2.5-3X speed certainly helps. Here’s a report I did on how to do those.

But it’s still a lot. I’m still working on balancing

Funding Sources of Independent Media

I wanted to wrap up with a review of what we’ve seen as ways to support independent media.

• Paid Substack subscriptions
• Patreon or other platforms (warning that Patreon has been known to censor so not recommended)
• Advertising through podcasts
• Membership sites
• Donations
• Book sales
• DVD’s/Info course sales
• Shirt or other gear sales

Whether it is a donation or a membership, recurring payments tend to help out the most because everyone has ongoing expenses.

Many of these people accept cryptocurrency donations, due to its censorship-resistant nature as well.

This boils down to this concept. If we want to see better news then it is worth paying for. Getting things for free is part of what has gotten us in this mess.

Even if you don’t have money, you can always say “thank you” and “good job.” Those kind of comments are fuel sometimes more powerful than money in want can be a tough job.

Questions for you, dear reader. What are your favorites intel sources? What if any other models have you seen for funding?

Part 2 of 3 part mini-series on Supporting Independent Media as part of the People’s Playbook

In the previous article, I detailed out six principles I use to vet out sources for helping to make sense of the news. In this and the next part of the series, I’ll share my main intel sources for independent media.

In this part, I’ll talk about where we are now, Substack, as a platform. Why I like it and have chosen to use it and the people on here that I follow. In the next part I’ll detail other people using various other platforms.

Here is why I’m using Substack. It is super simple to use. It takes over the details of collecting email optins and emailing out completely. While these are not difficult to do otherwise, Substack has made them seamless and automatic.

Substack also allows for both free and paid subscriptions. I have chosen at this time to make everything available for free for my writings here. Various other people give:

• Paid subscriber only posts
• Early access to posts
• Increased interaction
• Signed copies of books

Others use it completely as a donation only platform without any tangible benefit.

They’re rolling out new features such as podcasting via this platform too.

What we’ve seen is that people with a sizeable following, often earned from truth-telling, can make a decent or even great income from Substack. Of course, building a following from scratch is easier said than done.

Many investigative journalists that previously worked for mainstream media outlets instead find their home here.

Instead of some corporation or singular big benefactor being responsible for their paycheck, and thus influencing what can be said, the is a means of a bottoms-up decentralized funding source. That is a theme we’ll be returning to again and again.

And where income streams were demonetized or outright banned in other places, this can be a great place to grow it.

You can do your part in supporting the journalists you wish to see thrive. The point of the independent media is that the funding is independent too.

There does need to be a watchful eye towards audience capture, but this is of much less threat (at least right now) compared to corporate and government capture. Anyone who doesn’t seen that is pointing at pennies, while ignoring $100 bills.

Substack Channels I Follow

Here are the channels that I am currently following at the time of writing.

Hopkins is a playwright in Germany that provides an often needed humorous take on the “Rise of the New Normal” and the “Covidian Cult”. I wish I could write with the same wit and satire he does.

A former teacher in New York about propaganda, Miller fairly recently got fired for his views. Gives great insight into how propaganda works from someone that has studied it for decades. One of the things he does is keep an ever-growing list of accounts of those that “died suddenly” the world over. This includes some very disturbing videos. (Unknown causes are the leading cause of death in Alberta, Canada.)

Kirsch is bombastic, but very passionate. Has put his money where his mouth is, and he has millions that he is wielding in an attempt to get the truth out. Details the facts surrounding vaccination quite in depth from someone that got vaccinated himself.

Lawrie formerly worked for the WHO. She led the meta-analysis that showed, without a doubt that Ivermectin worked against COVID. She even recorded her colleague Andrew Hill talking about how he was pressured from the outside to arrive at the opposite conclusion.

Rappoport is more out-there than most here. He doesn’t believe in viruses. But again, I follow people that I don’t agree with completely. He often also provides imaginative and humorous takes on things.  

Berenson is a New York Times report that got squeezed out because of actually following the data on the vaccines. Got censored off Twitter, but is winning a case against them, and actually got reinstated, proving collusion between the White House and Twitter.

Greenwald was made famous from the Edward Snowden NSA leaks. Got squeezed out of a news organization he helped create, The Intercept. Now on Substack.

Taibbi is another mainstream journalist now independent. Does some very valuable deep dives with a humorous take, pointing out the hypocrisy involved often.

Eisenstein often talks about the mythology behind our the movement of the masses. Definitely a viewpoint that stands out from the rest.   

Siri is the main lawyer that the Informed Consent Action Network works with. He battles and wins cases against the pharmaceutical fraud machine with a focus on vaccines.

Some of these people are what I like to call “mainstream-adjacent,” such as Taibbi, Greenwald and Berenson. They only recently got squeeze out of the mainstream. While they cover certain topics well, they still follow the propaganda on such things as 9-11. Or thinking that only this vaccine is problematic but the vaccine program as a whole hasn’t been. In short, they only diverged from the masses recently.

Others are off the deep-end, and I say that with respect as I’m off the deep end myself. Again, parallax through multiple angles.

This is a living list. Some people I read everything from. Others I just glance at a few pieces here and there. Some I’ll stop following at some point. Others will be added.

And this is just around “news” topics. There are, of course, writers covering every sort of subject here on Substack.

Most of them I follow as free subscribers. A handful I lend a few bucks in support.

The Potential Downside

I’d be remiss if I didn’t cover this subject without this warning. Substack is a centralized website. They’ve made clear their stance on free speech and stood strongly for it, at least thus far. Here’s an excerpt from their article, Society Has a Trust Problem.

We will continue to take a strong stance in defense of free speech because we believe the alternatives are so much worse. We believe that when you use censorship to silence certain voices or push them to another place, you don’t make the misinformation problem disappear but you do make the mistrust problem worse.

Trust is built over time. It can be rebuilt over time, as long as those in positions of responsibility don’t succumb to pressure to take shortcuts. Trust can’t be won with a press release or a social media ban; and it can’t be strengthened by turning away from hard conversations. It comes from building and respecting relationships. For the media ecosystem, it requires building from a new foundation. 

That is the work we commit ourselves to at Substack. It is hard, and it is messy. It is the only way forward.

Will this continue to be the case always? I sincerely hope so.

But even if they do stand their ground, that would only mean that they’ll come under attack in other forms. They will be smeared and censored.

While I’m going to be using Substack for the time being, as a backup all articles will also be hosted on here on LoganChristopher.com, a platform I control.

Your turn. Who do you like on Substack?

---

Also wanted to mention a recent podcast I was on where we discussed the awakening process as well as much else.

A 3 part mini-series on Supporting Independent Media as part of the People’s Playbook

To do proper sensemaking on the world you need to get news from someplace.

The mainstream media is clearly corrupted. Some people still believe in the partisan games and therefore believe their side’s media due to this reason. But even while some truth gets out on these platforms there is still much that is hidden.

Mainstream media in the USA is all funded by corporations through advertising. Pharmaceuticals dominate the airwaves of news programs today. There are also interlocking directorates leading to top-down decisions on what is covered and what is not. (See #49 and #50 of Medical Monopoly Musings for details.) These are just a few of the important pieces to controlling journalism.

In other countries, the media is directly funded by the government.

Online the same games are being played. Big Tech is on board with mainstream media pushing their voices further, while suppressing others. And taking direction from government as well.

Many are of the mistaken assumption that truth can only come through such official channels. Thankfully more and more people are dropping such illusions.

The good news is that there are a great many independent voices available. But how do you separate the wheat from the chaff?

In this short series I want to deliver three things:

1. Principles for finding and vetting your own sources
2. A list of some of my top independent sources that I follow
3. An understanding of this “parallel news economy” and how you can play a part in it

Let’s get started with the principles.

Principles to Finding and Vetting Your Own Sources

Here’s my list of principles:

• Follow the Money
• Follow the Transparency
• Witness Mistakes
• Limited Hangouts and Seeking Parallax
• Follow the Smears
• Follow the Silenced

Follow the Money

Everyone has heard of this. This is what I mentioned before regarding the money flows of advertising, personal conflicts between board members and much more.

Two big things to ask here. Is the journalist corrupted from covering things by incentives either personally or institutionally?

Do they themselves follow the money in their coverage?

I won’t belabor this point as it is well-known. The other principles have a lot less awareness.

Follow the Transparency

Is the journalist transparent about their sources? Now, of course there are times when sources must be kept secret. But 98+% of times the source or reference can be shown.

Specifically, is the issue of data transparency rather than the fallacy of authorities. There is a big difference in saying “The CDC says…” compared to showing a specific study or data instead.  (And when you can use the CDC data to show the CDC is lying, well that tells you something.)

In the online world particularly, you want to see links to reference material. You’ll notice that I strove to do this in my own work because I witnessed others doing the same. It’s much more work but it is more trustworthy to do so.

If a source is transparent about where their facts are coming from that’s a big plus. (Of course, for true vetting you need to make sure the sources in fact say what the coverage says they say.)

If a source is not transparent about their facts, and is not transparent about potential conflicts of interest, then that’s a big negative.

Witness Mistakes

This is related to the subject of transparency. You obviously want to find someone with a good track record. These are people worth continuing following for making sense of the world. Do their stories and predictions pan out?

But no person is flawless. We all make mistakes.

How does this journalist handle theirs? Do they bury them and pretend they never got anything wrong?

Or do they come out and admit what they got wrong? Do they apologize? Do they openly talk about the subject?

This helps you to differentiate who are the propagandists and who are legitimate journalists.

Limited Hangouts and Seeking Parallax

The term “limited hangout” comes from intelligence. It means to leak out some partial truth in order to control the narrative. Along with the partial truth are either lies or just an avoidance of all the facts. This method is often used as part of damage control.

Here’s the thing. All news is essentially limited hangouts, albeit mostly unintentionally, because no one can possibly cover all angles. It is by necessity limited to some degree.

Parallax is the apparent displacement of an observed object due to change in position of the observer. By having two eyes you’re less likely to fall prey to blind spots that are inherent in a single point of view.

Journalistically, I think of parallax as being the idea that getting different viewpoints, different coverage on a story helps you to see it more accurately. Any single viewpoint is by definition, limited.

By having different sources, that come from different worldviews, you’re likely to come to understand more. This is especially true for those seeing past intentional limited hangouts as well as ideologies that everyone get wrapped up in. Especially those that don’t think they get wrapped up in ideologies, they’re the worst!

Follow the Smears

You must understand how smear campaigns work. I detailed this inside chapter 6 of The Tobacco Playbook.

If you want to go deeper, seeing how it plays out in the internet age, I’d recommend reading The Smear: How Shady Political Operatives and Fake News Control What You See, What You Think, and How You Vote by Sharyl Attkisson. 

Smears are nothing new. It’s just accelerated today.

Understand this…any good journalist dedicated to truth will be squeezed out from any mainstream place and will be smeared in the process.

Today the smears use the common phrases of “conspiracy theorist,” “right-wing,” “extremist,” “anti-vaxxer,” “science denier,” “racist,” and so on. I’ve been called all these things of course!

In smears you need to follow the other principles here. Are there transparent sources and data about the facts? Or is it merely ad hominem attacks?

Smearing is used as a control mechanism, so you must understand how it works.

Be warned that it is not as simple as flipping things to the inverse though. A good way to have controlled opposition gain credibility would be to have them smeared.

Follow the Silenced

I came across this meme the other day.

This is the next and often simultaneous step of smearing. To down-rank, shadowban or outright censor information.

If it doesn’t support the agendas, it will not get widespread distribution.

Again, you shouldn’t automatically 100% trust anything just because it is censored, but this can be seen as a clue.

Putting Them Together

These are the principles I use to vet out when looking at media and various sources.

Any one principle alone is a good start, but it is insufficient. By understanding and utilizing all of these you get a much better picture of who is worth listening too.

In the next two parts I’ll detail out my top intel sources, as well as showing how to support them.

But first I’d like to ask what your principles along these lines? Anything to add to this list?

Part 2 of The People’s Playbook

I figured I’d start with this one as it is something I am actively engaged in. I’ll be moving up to Idaho from California later this month.

Strategic Relocation is the name of a book by Joel Skousen. From his website:

---

Strategic Relocation is an in-depth analysis of North America’s safest places to live. Unlike most guides in today’s bookstores that tout the “best places” to live based on golf courses, doctor/patient ratios, warm sunny climates, availability of cultural activities, status of educational institutions and the growth potential of the local economy, this book will help you consider future threats that most other people fail to see or choose to ignore such as:

• A labor crisis or pandemic that halts the inflow of food and business goods
• An economic crisis that threatens your pensions, investments and other so-called “guaranteed” income streams
• A major earthquake or other natural disaster that suddenly upsets the natural social order for months at a time
• An emergency that clogs the area’s freeways
• The “unthinkable” nuclear war or major terrorist attack on a U.S. city with chemical or biological weapons

Joel is an extremely conservative man. And I do not mean conservative as the slur that it is commonly used today. I mean it genuinely. As such, I do not share all his viewpoints. At the same time, that is great because I enjoy learning from people who I do not share all viewpoints on.

It’s quite mind-stretching to see that he believes with some certainly that at some point the USA will be attacked by Russia in a limited nuclear war. Apparently, Russia never bought in the MAD idea (mutually assured destruction) and thought a nuclear war was winnable.

Then I was also just reading in The Pentagon’s Brain, a book about DARPA, about the “super plague” that the Russians were supposedly working on too! But don’t worry the head scientist of such biological weapons defected to the USA.

Anyway…

This book covers very many interesting things. Also included is Joel’s viewpoint is that inside the USA is still better than any other country to be in. That many places that people think of in Central and South America are to go total military dictatorship, as many have before.

If the book interests you than by all means grab a copy. But even without that want to talk about this subject.

My wife and I had actually have been trying to get out of California since 2019 before the pandemic even started. While I love California’s geography and weather, as well my friends that live here, the economics and politics are not serving me.

Our primary reason for moving is that my daughter cannot attend school in California without following the CDC’s schedule of vaccinations. And that’s a hell-no-over-my-dead-body thing for me. While we could homeschool in California, that is not something we are desiring to do at this time.

We moved up to Oregon for a short time. While better on this front currently, that state seems to be following in California’s footsteps.

Unfortunately, a long strange bout of unidentified disease with turned out to by Lyme in my wife brought us back to California, as we needed family support. But after a diagnosis, while not healed completely yet, we’re were in a much better place. Good enough to seek to move outside California again.

After visiting several states we made the decision to move to Idaho. This was before getting Joel’s book, but I was happy to see that state rated the highest at four and a half stars out of five. (Utah being the only other state with that rating)

In Idaho we found a school that never even required kids to wear masks throughout the whole pandemic.

(It was quite ironic to view other Waldorf schools that advocate for no screen time at all for young children…that went to distance learning during the pandemic! Can you say cognitive dissonance? I believe Rudolf Steiner is rolling over in his grave.)

Idaho happens to have the freest laws regarding home schooling. You can basically do anything you want. So that’s good to know should we want that option in the future, which indeed we may choose is necessary in due time.

The gun laws are of course very lax as compared to California.

No one much thinks about Idaho, as compared to some of the other states that have much more focus that many are moving to such as Texas and Florida. I think less attention on the world stage is a good thing.

Since my house burned down in California, looking at the natural disasters of the area was obviously important too. I personally didn’t want to deal with hurricanes so the East Coast wasn’t an option for me. Idaho doesn’t have much. Fires are a possibility there, but not something that has happened in the area I’m moving too.

And then there is the cost. While house prices have risen significantly in Idaho as they did everywhere over the last couple years, and more so because of a lot of other people relocating, it was still cheap by California standards. This immediate savings in cost of living can then be repurposed for some of the other strategies I’ll be covering in the People’s Playbook. 

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

While the circumstances are certainly not the same, I’ve often wondered about the Jews in Germany back in WW2 and before then. At what point was the right time to get out? There obviously was a too late. But there were many that left earlier and thus were spared.

California is on a trajectory. I don’t see that changing any time soon, so I’ve chosen to leave now before it is deemed necessary.  It’s not an easy choice. In fact it changes just about everything in my life to do so.

And this is exactly why this strategy is so important.

Where you live is your home base. This is your base of operations in which the other strategies will be implemented.

Where you live is one of the major fronts of the war that we’re all fighting on.

I have a sense that it is harder to enact change in California due to that trajectory and the demographics. Meanwhile, with its smaller population, more can likely be done in Idaho politically, legally and economically.

Plus it should be much easier to find like-minded people too. (After all there are still people in Santa Cruz driving around by themselves wearing masks here. As I write this, I can see school children walking by themselves outside wearing masks through my office window.)

Here’s a few questions for you to ponder:

• Are you in a strategic location or simply a location of circumstance?
• What are the benefits, costs, threats and opportunities in where you live?
• Should you relocate? Where to?
• Should the shit-hit-the-fan do you have a plan B and plan C for strategic relocation?

As I’ve discussed in the Civilization Collapse Stack, your home is a massively important piece of the puzzle, especially if aiming for subsistence. Mobility is also important too so don’t neglect that.

I’ve chosen to relocate for a wide number of reasons, most of which were mentioned above. And I’m far from the only one. Many others have done the same and many, many more will still do in the coming years.

It’s tough because there is no guarantee that it is the right choice, but I’m playing the odds. What about you?

I’m back to writing on worldly topics but in a new location (Substack…I’ll talk more about why I chose this another time) and now focused on solutions to some of the problems we see ourselves in.

I’m calling this new series The People’s Playbook. This is in contrast to The Tobacco Playbook that I’ve extensively detailed here, which of course is not just about Big Tobacco, but has been used by industry everywhere. That deep dive was to understand the structure of how it’s done.

A 1956 story of Pharmaceutical Corruption

In 1956, Dr. Henry Welch was the chief of antibiotics at the FDA. He’d been awarded a Distinguished Service Gold Medal from the US for his development of a system of testing and approving penicillin during the war.

Dr. Welch was the keynote speaker at a conference, the Fourth Annual Symposium on Antibiotics. This event was co-sponsored by the FDA with all expenses paid by MD Publications. This company was run by a psychiatrist Felix Mari-Ibanez. It published two technical journals, Antibiotics and Chemotherapy and Antibiotic Medicine and Clinical Therapy. Dr. Welch co-edited these along with Marti-Ibanez.

At the conference, Welch in his speech said, “We are now in the third era of antibiotic therapy” and that “synergistic” antibiotics would be successful were traditional antibiotics weren’t.

This was basically the launch party for Pfizer’s new wonder drug, Sigmamycin. Pfizer advertised as the “Third era of antibiotics.” One ad read: “More and More Physicians Find Sigmamycin the Antibiotic Therapy of Choice”. This ad included business cards with eight names, addresses and phone numbers of physicians, touting it was “highly effective” and “clinically proved.”

John Lear was an investigative journalist and science editor at the Saturday Review. Lear tried contacting these doctors in the ad by mail and phone. His mail came back undeliverable. The phone numbers didn’t reach doctors. They were fake.

Pfizer’s own medical director found that 27% of people experienced side effects from Sigmamycin. Their promotions of the drug touted no side effects.

Lear would go on to discuss Dr. Welch about his connections. Welch said, “Where my income comes from is my own business” and that regarding MD Publications, “My only connection is as an editor, for which I receive an honorarium.”

But he was lying.

In a congressional investigation, a copywriter for Pfizer would go on to explain that Welch had submitted his speech ahead of the conference to approval from Pfizer. This copywriter punched it up specifically with talk of the “third era of antibiotics” which was the main claim they’d use in their advertising.

After the symposium, Pfizer purchased 238,000 reprints of Dr. Welch’s speech. As part of Welch’s deal, he received half the income from these reprints. While Pfizer gave a few of these out, most ended up in the garbage. It was simply a legal bribe.

Further investigation revealed the numbers. The FDA paid Welch a salary of $17,500 per year. And between 1953 and 1960 an average of $35892.75 was made from his publishing ventures. He made twice as much from his extra activities than his main job, so who do you think he was ultimately loyal too? Just an honorarium, ha!

When these numbers came out, Dr. Welch resigned in disgrace. He retired to Florida with his pension intact.

This was not an isolated incident. A drug examiner turned whistleblower named Barbara Moulton had spent five years at the FDA before she resigned in protest around that time. She said the agency “failed utterly” in policing the way drugs were marketed and sold. That the FDA bowed to those it regulated. She had even been reprimanded for not being “sufficiently polite to members of the pharmaceutical industry.”

The aforementioned ad for Pfizer was put out by an advertising agency owned by Dr. Arthur Sackler, the main man behind Pfizer’s advertisements, in fact most of those of various pharmaceutical companies. Sackler was also the financial backer for MD Publications.

Subpoenaed letters later revealed that Sackler and Welch communicated personally. That Welch asked for “a little outside help” in funding a new journal.

If the name Sackler sounds familiar to you, it is because of the headlines of the Sackler Family that owned Purdue Pharma, one of the major players in the opioid epidemic. Arthur Sackler was the patriarch, and the playbook they followed was started a long time ago. This story comes from Empire of Pain: The Secret History of the Sackler Dynasty by Patrick Radden Keefe.

Now reflect on this.

Is this same drug company involved in misleading advertising, overstating the benefits while downplaying the side effects?

Has the buying of reprints in medical journals legal bribery loophole ever been closed?

Are there people at the FDA resigning in protest even in the last couple of months?

Are there similar financial connections going on between a web of companies, individuals, and regulators?

Different decade, different people…

Same companies, same regulatory body, same tactics…

Unfortunately, the same story over and over again. That is until we all learn better.