A BLOG ABOUT INDEPENDENT POLITICS, POLITICAL ETHICS, ECONOMICS, AND ANARCHISM. Political theory, U.S. politics & election statistics, the political spectrum, constitutional law & civil liberties, civil rights & interstate commerce, taxation & monetary policy, health care & insurance law, labor law & unions, unemployment & wages, homelessness, international relations, religion, technology; alternatives to the state
Monday, February 22, 2021
Government-Involved Child Sexual Abuse Scandals: Which Ones Are the Easiest to Prove?
The Government Does Not Yet Have the Authority to Give You What You Want
The mainstream media and the college law professors don't know or care how the law actually works. The federal government does not have the power to give raises to people whom it does not employ.
The government does not have the power or the authority to do the things you want it to do.
Joe Biden is a constitutionalist. He does not care that people want a $15 minimum wage, and he doesn't want to tell you that the reason he's not giving it to you, is because it's unconstitutional. He certainly doesn't want you to learn how to use the amendment process to allow the federal government to do what you want it to do.
Americans
need voter education and constitutional education badly.
Study
the 9th and 10th Amendments, Article I Section 8 of the Constitution (the Enumerated Powers), and how the Constitution is amended. This will help you understand which duties are supposed to be held by the national government, and which are supposed to be held by the state and local governments, and the people.
American voters should stop blaming only Republicans for denying them what they want. It is not only the Republican Party legislators, but also the Constitution - and President Biden - who don't want people to get the changes to the law which they are demanding.
We can argue all day long about what kind of laws we should have, and which duties belong in the hands of the national or state governments, all day long. But the fact remains: the Constitution is the law, and it is a limitation upon what kinds of laws may exist.
Amending Article I Section 8, to allow or require the national government to exclusively regulate certain fields of law and policies, is the only way to achieve things like a national minimum wage increase that resembles what progressives are asking for. It is the only way to achieve a minimum wage increase, a federal jobs guarantee, or any sort of mass debt forgiveness program, in a way that is not unconstitutional.
Enshrining reforms in the Constitution, with proper amendment, is the only way to shield those policies from easy tampering; whether by majorities, minorities, governors, presidential vetoes and signing statements, or activist judges. We must cease pursuing temporary fixes to our numerous economic and political problems, and instead resolve to pursue permanent forms of meaningful, revolutionary amounts of change.
This country was founded on democratic-republicanism, but also on liberal-conservatism. We have to conserve the progress and freedom that we have achieved. We must consider social republicanism - specifically enshrining the people's human rights into the document by which the people's republic is constituted - in order to specifically enumerate more of our rights.
We can, and must, do this, without suggesting that the mere appearance of these rights in the Constitution, does not necessarily mean that those are our only rights. Moreover, the mere appearance of a subject in the Constitution does not necessarily connote that the national government retains the exclusive right to legislate upon that manner.
Through education about the Ninth Amendment, the separation of powers, and natural rights which originate from the virtue of our humanity, we can overcome the perceived conflict between (positive) rights and (negative) freedoms.
Once we realize that we are parts of the Earth - breathing its air, drinking its water, and being made of food that grew out of the ground - we assert our right to hunt, gather, forage, farm, or glean whatever we may need, in order to survive.
We have a right to appropriate whatever is necessary to survive, since if we exercise our right to refuse to use the state's money, then we constantly find ourselves on other people's property, in order to obtain the food and water we need. To say that a person has a right to eat, does not necessarily impose an obligation upon someone else to provide him with that food. It is a mere recognition that we cannot survive without eating, drinking, breathing, etc..
We do not need private property in the means of production, money, or licensed work in order to survive. We need to do enough labor as it takes to acquire what we need to survive, and perform as much action as is necessary to assert our freedom and independence. But we will not die if we run out of money, or ability to solely own a factory or workplace, in the same way that we will die if we run out of food, water, and air.
Shelter and medicine are gray areas, but it is worth noting that the value of these things are kept artificially high through zoning laws, construction laws, high costs of building permits, medical patent laws, unnecessary sales taxes, and professional licensing laws, and could thus be much less expensive, and therefore require less work in order to purchase.
There is no reason why we cannot recognize human rights, and human needs, without endorsing the use of a centralized, violent state apparatus to "give" us (or recognize) those rights. Such apparati have rarely done so.
We must therefore withdraw our trust and support - and also our consent - from the government, and from its officials and employees. Being that governments are instituted to preserve men's freedom, a government which lacks the consent of the governed is not legitimate.
To say "the time to trust government is over" is to suggest that it was ever wise to trust government. All government which operates on the statist model - a monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a given territory - exists in order to legitimize the violence used by its employees, and to legalize their crimes.
The state exists to criminalize the violence of its subjects, and to legalize the violence of its officials. The state establishes a border within which the government has an exclusive right to inflict politically motivated initimidation - terror, that is - upon a populace, and to give them nowhere to turn for defense or redress of their grievances, except for that very same aggressive state.
The state is a self-legitimizing terrorist entity.
We cannot trust the government to tell us the truth about what the law is, nor about how it works. Nor can we trust the government to allow us the ability to hunt, forage, glean, homestead, etc., enough to survive, without resorting to begging the government's help. Why would government help us become independent? It doesn't benefit the government at all to help us acquire a home as property, in a way which the government can't simply take away from us, after charging us an inordinate amount of property taxes.
We can't even trust the government to deliver on its "promise" of $1400 checks. If the government would yank a $1400 check out of your hand, then why wouldn't it collude with universities to make you hate the very same document (the Constitution) which you could easily amend in order to achieve legal reforms that could result in you having more freedom, opportunity, and prosperity?
There's no reason to hate the Constitution, and "throw the baby out with the bath water" in terms of ditching tools that could be used to limit government and separate powers, just because the Constitution still allows involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime (now referred to as "the new slavery" in the prisons).
The Thirteenth Amendment is amended - and violence, secrecy, and torture are drastically reduced in prisons - the sooner people will no longer be able to rightfully claim that the Constitution allows slavery to continue to exist. It certainly does exist now; not only the outright chattel slavery, forced labor, and sex slavery which exists in the prisons, but also a general state of political slavery (and wage and debt slavery) which exists in the so-called "free" population as well.
Given that we have a slave society, why should we trust the government to afford us either freedom or "rights" (however we define that term)? Why trust a corrupt government more, when we know it can't do what we want it to, and wouldn't do those things even if it had the rightful authority?
It's time to stop lying to ourselves. We must engage in mutual aid, direct action, charitable acts, voluntary association, voluntary cooperation, and transparent self-governance of firms. That is the only way to bring production and innovation back to the United States, which the government insists on either penalizing and deterring through inordinate tax rates, or else only promoting for the sake of the financial benefit of the people whose corrupt business interests run the government.
We can use the Constitution to limit government and abolish slavery, or we can resort to anarchy to abolish government and slavery. Until our governments stop lying to us, neither alternative should be taken off of the table.
But additionally, if the government insists upon continuing to lie - and to mislead us about the Constitution's meaning, and brainwash us against what is good about that document, and about limited government - then anarchy will look like a rational choice in comparison to even the most permanent and meaningful reform.
That's because such reform will continue to look impossible, because the majority of Americans will have no idea how to formally achieve those reforms through law in a way that cannot be easily tampered with.
I have previously commented on the topics mentioned above; in three articles and three videos. Those posts are linked below.
http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2021/01/half-of-federal-laws-do-not-apply-to.html
http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2021/01/what-is-congress-allowed-to-do-and-what.html
http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2021/01/letter-to-political-science-professor.html
http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2021/01/links-to-all-of-my-videos-about.html
Written and Published on February 22nd, 2021
Tuesday, February 9, 2021
How Committed is the Green Party to the Principle of Decentralization?
The purpose of this article is to determine on which policy topics the Green Party and its supporters are most committed to decentralization. Decentralization is one of the Green Party's Ten Key Values.
gp.org/four_pillars_ten_key_values
I put this article together after the party's last presidential nominee, Howie Hawkins, ran on a platform that called for increased centralization of the regulation of energy and transportation affairs into the hands of the national government.
This platform prompted me to ask, "If Hawkins is leading the party to support more centralization on energy and transportation, then on which other issues is the Green Party still whole-heartedly committed to decentralization?"
I have sorted thirty-one major topics in politics, into seven categories: Centralize More, Keep Centralized, Mostly Centralized, Promote a Mix (...), Mostly Decentralize, Keep Decentralized, and Decentralize More.
[Policy Topics Which Most of the Green Party Wants to] Centralize More
-
State Department / diplomacy
(centralize through growing and
properly funding, and demilitarize by transforming into a
Department of Peace)
- Interstate regulation of commerce
-
Energy, and provision of public utilities
(centralize, but
eliminate influence of businesses, lobbyists, and monopolies)
-
Transportation
(centralize, but streamline, and eliminate
business & lobbyist influence)
- Campaign finance
reform
(centralize, but streamline, and eliminate business &
lobbyist influence)
- Labor Department
(centralize in order to
create a jobs guarantee)
- Justice Department & the Attorney
General, incl. courts
[...] Keep Centralized
-
International trade, including tariffs
- Establishing uniform rule
of naturalization of immigrants
Mostly Centralize
-
Elections
(cooperative or corporative federalism; national
government should supervise more)
- State public worker
benefits
(increase national supervision of public sector
employees' affairs, benefits, and bargaining)
Promote
a Mix of Centralization and Decentralization, inc through Cooperative
or Triple Federalism
-
Military / Department of Defense / Pentagon / common
defense
(centralize its administration, but reduce its use, and
demilitarize it, while decentralizing public defense)
- Social
Security / retirement
(centralize by growing S.S. into Social
Security for All, i.e.,
a U.B.I. to every American, which would decentralize the
distribution of U.S. Dollars)
-
Agriculture
(cooperative or triple federalism, but eliminate
business & lobbyist influence)
- Education
(cooperative or
triple federalism, but eliminate business & lobbyist influence)
-
Child welfare
(cooperative or triple federalism)
-
Health
(cooperative or triple federalism, but eliminate business
& lobbyist influence)
- Housing & Urban
Development
(cooperative or triple federalism, but eliminate
business & lobbyist influence)
- Taxation
(both states and federal government should have taxation power)
Mostly
Decentralize
-
Treasury
(keep Treasury Dept., but decentralize through a UBI)
-
Veterans' Affairs
(decentralize, or abolish, or make unnecessary
by putting its activities under Defense Dept. &/or H.H.S.)
-
Native American affairs
(localize through increasing tribal
autonomy)
- Patents / intellectual property
(keep
administration centralized, but reduce durations)
- Gun control
laws
- The
internet
(centralize regulation as a public utility in order to
foster a decentralized or polycentric creative / collaborative
commons)
Keep Decentralized or Balanced
- Law enforcement and policing, prisons and
jails
Decentralize More
-
Interior Dept. / land management
(decentralize to the
bioregions)
- E.P.A. / environment & ecology
(decentralize
to the bioregions)
- Homeland Security
(decentralize, shrink,
and abolish)
- Sanctuary cities and sanctuary states
- Mutual
aid, direct action. and charity
Monday, February 8, 2021
Achieving Stability During a Budget Deficit: Four Pillars of Fiscal Solvency
The diagram below shows that there are four things Congress can do to attempt to solve a budget deficit. These are four tools that Congress can use to fill the gap between how much tax revenue the government is taking in during a given year, and the full cost of the annual budget.
1.
Increase tax revenues in a manner which will result in the raising of
an additional $800 billion this year.
2.
Borrow $800 billion more this year than the federal government did
last year.
3.
Reduce spending by $800 billion as compared to last year.
4.
Inflate by $800 billion (i.e., announce
a new "Quantitative Easing" program, and authorize the
Federal Reserve Bank to purchase $800 billion worth of U.S. Treasury
bonds).
In my opinion, politics would probably be a lot simpler if this set of proposals were viewed as the baseline or "centrist" position, and if the political parties were split along the lines of the degree to which a politician or party advocated overreliance or under-reliance on any particular one of the tools.
The importance of inflation and borrowing is under-emphasized in the media. Political propaganda tells us that Democrats want to spend more money, while Republicans want to spend less. The truth is that neither major party is seriously considering the severe budget measures which it will require to get us out of the huge hole in which we find ourselves (nearly $28 trillion in debt).
Actually paying off the debt will require achieving a budget surplus for many years in a row, and using that money to reimburse the nations and bondholders who loaned the government those funds.
Fortunately, though, the same tools can be used to achieve a surplus, which can be used to fill-in the deficit. I have recommended paying-off $1 trillion dollars a year, as soon as a $1 trillion annual surplus can be achieved.
1.
Increase tax revenues in a manner which will result in the raising of
an additional $1.05 trillion this year.
2.
Borrow $1.05 trillion more this year than the federal government did
last year.
3.
Reduce spending by $1.05 trillion as compared to last year.
4.
Inflate by $1.05 trillion (i.e., announce
a new "Quantitative Easing" program, and authorize the
Federal Reserve Bank to purchase $1.05 trillion worth of U.S. Treasury
bonds).
Opinion: Israelis Probably Lying About Making Contact with Extraterrestrials
Table of Contents
1. Israel and Aliens
2. Israel Needs Good Publicity
3. Americans Turned a Blind Eye to Child Abuse in the 1990s
4. Adaptive Information Processing (A.I.P.) and Trauma
5. The X-Files Substituted Alien Abduction for Child Abduction
6. John Podesta Believes in Aliens
7. Steven Spielberg's E.T. is a Pedophile Grooming Film
8. Disclaimer: Jews vs. Israel
9. Conclusion
Content
1. Israel and Aliens
On February 1st, 2021, Scientific American published an article titled “Astronomer Avi Loeb Says Aliens Have Visited, and He's Not Kidding”. Avi Loeb is an American-Israeli scientists. He bases his claim that aliens have made contact with human beings, on the idea that the pancake-like shape of the object 'Oumuamua is so odd that it could not be naturally occurring.
You can read more about Avi Loeb's claims at the following links:
http://www.amazon.com/Extraterrestrial-First-Intelligent-Beyond-Earth/dp/0358278147
Two months prior to the publication of that article – on December 10th, 2021 – the Times of Israel published an article titled “Israeli space chief says aliens may well exist, but they haven't met humans”.
The Times reported that Israel's space chief, Isaac Ben Israel, said that aliens exist. This came in response to the claims of retired Israeli “space pioneer” Haim Eshed, that aliens “visited Earth” and “made deals with people”. According to Eshed, Israel has had contact with a “Galactic Federation” for some time now, but the rest of humanity is not yet ready for contact with aliens.
I, for one, am not buying any of this, however.
Don't get me wrong; I think it's totally possible that aliens exist, given the size of the universe, particularly the parts of it which humanity has not yet explored (i.e., the vast majority of it). But I wouldn't say “aliens exist” with the confidence with which Isaac Ben Israel has said so. I have no proof, nor any evidence.
A few notes before proceeding: 1) Not all so-called “U.F.O.s” contain aliens or extraterrestrial beings. 2) U.F.O.s are real, but the belief in U.F.O.s does not necessarily mean a belief in aliens. 3) “U.F.O.” stands for “Unidentified Flying Object”. 4) The fact that there have been objects labeled “U.F.O.s”, means that U.F.O.s undoubtedly exist, but does not necessarily prove that aliens exist. Hopefully no further explanation should be necessary.
U.F.O.s exist. And aliens may well exist. But the Israelis need to show us more proof. All we have to go on, is bare assertion, and a pancake-shaped asteroid.
The debate between Isaac Ben Israel and Haim Eshed reminds me of what Noam Chomsky said about the “Overton Window”, the window of acceptable debate.
Chomsky said that people who want to restrict free speech and restrict debate, create the illusion of free speech, by only allowing debate within a narrow range (or window) of acceptability, but promoting lively debate within that range.
The publicity which Ben Israel and Eshed received for their views on alien contact, has effectively restricted the debate, so that the only acceptable positions are “We've definitely made contact, and the Israeli space chief said so” and “We've definitely made contact, but don't tell people outside of Israel about it.”
This narrow range of acceptable viewpoints risks inculcating people into worship and blind obedience of government, and possibly also Israeli or Jewish superiority. [Note: This is not to say that all Jewish people are Jewish supremacists! I am saying the Israeli government takes advantage of the Jewish religion in order to centralize its power.]
The people of Israel, and the world over, should be cautious about believing what the Israelis say at face value.
2. Israel Needs Good Publicity
The Israelis are, of course, in a monumental amount of trouble at the moment.
Ghislaine Maxwell - a possible asset of the M.O.S.S.A.D. (the Israeli equivalent of the C.I.A., the foreign surveillance apparatus) - is in U.S. custody, and faces decades in prison. This, after her ex-boyfriend and protector Jeffrey Epstein was reportedly murdered in his prison cell, amid much debate regarding how it was done, who could have done it, and even whether he was smuggled out and replaced with a body double.
Maxwell's father, for those who don't know, was an Israeli super-spy who died mysteriously on a yacht named for his daughter, after stealing a highly valuable prosecutorial software called PROMIS and providing it to Israel and other actors. More and more Americans are discovering this fact every day, as well as the fact that Harvey Weinstein hired Israeli hitmen from an organization called Black Cube to stalk women whom he thought were going to rat him out for sexual abuse (which was exposed by Ronan Farrow in The New Yorker and his book Catch and Kill).
The Israelis need a distraction from Epstein, Maxwell, Weinstein and Black Cube, Alan Dershowitz (who defended Epstein, and Israeli spies involved in nuclear secrets theft and 9/11), The Zionist Bronfman family's funding of the NXIVM Hollywood sex cult, and the growing sentiment against Israel's occupation of Palestine and against the pro-Israel lobby in America.
So why not aliens?
I believe that we have not made contact with aliens. I believe that the Israelis are lying on purpose.
I suspect that any Israeli who says with confidence that we have made contact, is making it up in order to promote Israel, which prides itself on its technology (for example, its microchips, and its health technology).
3. Americans Turned a Blind Eye to Child Abuse in the 1990s
4. Adaptive Information Processing (A.I.P.) and Trauma
5. The X-Files Substituted Alien Abduction for Child Abduction
Did
you ever stop to think about what the show X-Files
is about, aside from merely aliens?
Fox
Mulder spends the whole show – and especially the movie – looking
for his lost sister Samantha, who was abducted as a child. Her older
brother thinks it was aliens, and will stop at nothing to find out
what the F.B.I. knows about aliens, other mysterious beings, and his
sister's disappearance.
Who
does David Duchovny's Fox Mulder work for? A secretive F.B.I.
director, played by Mitch Pileggi, who's constantly telling him to
keep quiet about things he's not assigned to and that are outside of
his jurisdiction.
They're
always telling him to stop asking questions. It's a conspiracy of
silence.
It
apparently never occurred to Fox Mulder that the fact that his little
sister was abducted as
a child
may suggest kidnappers
rather than aliens.
Someone apparently forgot to tell a young Fox that kidnappers don't
just want money, they might also want to touch your genitals.
The
whole point of the show is to ask the question “Where did Mulder's
sister go?” and then half-answer it with a mix of “It was aliens”
and “stop asking questions”. The show is back now, and – in a
reverse of what happened to Jesse
Ventura's Conspiracy Theory
- it is focusing on real-life government scandals more than the
paranormal.
It's
hard to say whether X-Files
wanted to encourage its audience to question their government more
(as things seemed), or instead wanted to distract them from
kidnappings, with rumors of alien abductions. As far as I can tell -
based on Epstein, Maxwell, the Bronfmans, Hastert, and the admissions
of former C.I.A. agent John Kiriakou – some of these child
disappearances are actually being done
by the U.S. government itself.
Given
what we know about how closely our government often works with
Hollywood, it's hard not to wonder whether Americans were
intentionally
bombarded with alien stories, to distract American parents from what
they really should have been worried about: teen drug addiction, teen
pregnancy, teen S.T.D. rates (including H.I.V.) and who's responsible
for all the child disappearances (now that we “know” it's not the
school teachers or the Satanists. Right?).
6. John Podesta Believes in Aliens
Considering
this possibility - that aliens are being used as scapegoats for child
disappearances – is it any wonder that former Hillary Clinton
presidential campaign manager John Podesta both believes in aliens,
and
has been accused of child rape?
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/clinton-campaign-chief-john-podesta-s-interest-ufos-out-world-n674711
In
October 2016, NBC News reported that Wikileaks had leaked a 2014
e-mail from Rebecca Hardcastle Wright to Eryn Sepp and John Podesta.
The topics of the e-mail were extraterrestrial experience and
consciousness science.
wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/15052
Does this constitute an admission by the government that aliens exist? No. More likely, it is what the government directed the mainstream media to offer-up to the public, as one of the "real" Wikileaks that they are "allowed to see", in order to distract us from the more concerning contents of the Podesta e-mails.
The
e-mail may be from 2014, but N.B.C. didn't report it until the month
before the 2016 election, when Wikileaks released the most damning of
the John Podesta e-mails. This, to me, suggests that the admission
that Podesta sent e-mails about aliens, may have been published in
order to cover
for, and distract from, the larger concern.
The
larger concern was, as you may remember, the allegations that he was
involved in either cannibalism or child rape, in addition to
participating in the occult “spirit cooking” so-called “art”
practiced by apparent witch Marina Abramovic.
Researchers
were not without cause to suspect Podesta. A photograph surfaced of
him with a bandage on one of his fingers, while instructions from
Abramovic on how to do a spirit cooking ritual included cutting
oneself on that same finger. Additionally, in the same photograph,
Podesta appeared with a fish drawn on one hand, and the number 14 on
the other, which researchers speculated is a reference to the Osiris
myth.
Podesta
also received an e-mail on October 8th,
2015 – from Hillary Clinton aide Tamera Stanton Luzzatto – saying
that her granddaughters (whose ages she listed) would be in a heated
pool “for entertainment”. Luzzatto – whose husband David J.
Leiter once worked as an aide for John Kerry and also lobbied for
Burisma – invited Podesta to the event.
http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/46736
Researchers
discovered that Tamera Luzzatto once operated a blog called “Evie's
Crib”, which some researchers believe Luzzatto used to profit off
of using her daughters as underage camgirls (i.e.,
showing
their naked bodies to paying strangers over the internet).
Podesta's
allusion to Osiris is not the only hint that something was off,
spiritually, about the 2016 Democratic presidential campaign of
Hillary Clinton. Clinton herself was shown to have mentioned the
ancient Caananite Moloch in an e-mail, apparently sarcastically
commenting on how her critics seem to regard her as some sort of
demon. Clinton may have been making a joke, but her awareness of
Moloch is interesting to note.
Like
the Israelis, it looks like John Podesta (and Hillary Clinton, and
Tamera Luzzatto) has a lot to distract people from.
So
why not aliens!?
7. Steven Spielberg's E.T. is a Pedophile Grooming Film
8. Disclaimer: Jews vs. Israel
I have
entertained a lot of unlikely, but also difficult, possibilities in
this article. I have Jewish friends and family members, and that is
why it pains me to have to consider the possibility that there are so
many lies coming out of the State of Israel.
I
want to make myself absolutely clear: The State of Israel does not
represent all Jewish people. To admit that it doesn't represent all
Jews, is not to say that Jewish people are divided on the issue and
therefore vulnerable. Admitting that there is disagreement in the
Jewish community over what to do in and with the Holy Land, actually
helps
dispel
harmful
stereotypes that Jewish people have more allegiance to Judaism or
Israel than to their host countries.
Those
who steal nuclear secrets, or traffic children, or engage in other
corrupt or criminal acts, have
no religion.
People who use violence to promote a political or religious agenda
have
no religion.
If religion is an organized form of spirituality designed to help one
live in, and adjust to, the world, and to people of other faiths
living upon it, then people who commit illegal and immoral acts in
the name of religion are hypocrites and liars.
That
is why, I believe, Jesus said “they are the Synagogue of Satan”
in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9. He used the term to describe “Those who
say they are Jews and are not.” Not
all Jewish people
are responsible for what Ghislaine Maxwell, or Benjamin Netanyahu, or
Jonathan Pollard did, nor for what Steven Spielberg may have done.
Only those who say they are Jews but are not. These people use
Judaism as a cover for, and a distraction from, their crimes. They
deflect criticism by characterizing all criticism of their crimes as
an attack upon all Jewish people, or upon the religion.
None
of what I am saying should be construed to disparage the Jewish
religion, nor the Jewish people, nor Israeli citizens. I aim only to
criticize people in the Israeli government, the Israeli intelligence
community and space forces, and certain Jewish-Americans in Hollywood
who may be aligned with insidious elements in the State of Israel.
Those
elements are, sorry to say, evidently working to sabotage the United
States, through trafficking its children for sex; in order to: 1)
seal business and political deals, 2) blackmail people, and 3) use
the entertainment industry to sexually groom American children and
corrupt their sexual mores.
9. Conclusion
But who would want that? Who would that benefit?
Written
on February 8th,
2021
Edited on February 16th, 2021
Memes not created by the author.
Second meme added on June 23rd, 2021
Based on notes written on February 5th, 2021
How to Fold Two Square Pieces of Card Stock into a Box
This series of images shows how to take two square pieces of card stock (or thick paper), and cut and fold them into two halves of a b...
-
Table of Contents 1. First Introduction 2. Second Introduction 3. Artificial Sweeteners, Feces, Cheese, Antibiotics, Coffee, Alcohol, and ...
-
Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Cuomos Tied to Ghislaine Maxwell and Pedophile Producer John Griffin 3. Gavin Newsom's Wife Alleged...
-
The following list of thirty television shows, consists of shows that either desensitize people to children getting hurt physically or ...




