There is a great conspiracy, a centralized plan to attack people everywhere. I think that there is top-down control coming from a small group. Let’s call them by a neutral-sounding name, the cabal.
I ask: If there is only a small cabal of persons who want us to die, and a very large group of people — say, 5 billion adults (a billion is a thousand million) — who don’t want to die, why don’t the latter, the huge majority, overwhelm the former? How can a relatively small cabal pull it off? It seems that they are able to get people from all walks of life to do their bidding. But how?
The Medical Profession and Health-Care Workers
This morning I read a report by a Canadian physician, Dr. Trozzi, who says that 80 doctors in Canada have died due to (or at least subsequent to) taking the Covid vaccine. Dr. Trozzi went on to mention a letter sent by a Dr. Makis to the Canadian Medical Association “respectfully asking that they fulfill their duties by investigating the deaths.” (Makis also asks for a halt of vaccine mandates for medical workers, but that’s a bit late as most have already been mandatorily injected.)
How can anyone be so polite and restrained as to “respectfully request” an investigation? Isn’t it perfectly normal for unusual deaths to be discussed openly? And does not each doctor have some colleague-friends whom he could phone to arrange for a group refusal?
Let’s face it. The medical profession let us down during the Covid Affair. Any doctor could have seen what was happening and could have tried to stop it at least by saying, “I won’t be a party to this.” Hundreds of doctors did refuse to commit the required sin and thus lost their license to practice, but there are more than a half million physicians in the US alone (according to aamc.org).
Of all those American doctors, I sort them into three groups: doctors who were fully aware that it was a genocide and participated willingly (no doubt declining to get vaxxed themselves); doctors who had at least a basic awareness that Covid was a scam but did not speak out; and doctors who are substandard in the cerebral department (how did they graduate from medical school?) or who went into denial. The last group rolled up their sleeve and took the vax.
There are also many healthcare workers — it’s a booming industry involving nurses, blood technicians, psychologists, CATscan personnel, and many other specialties. However, I will leave them aside for today. The ones who work in hospitals must obey the hospital’s protocol or lose their job. (Many nurses did speak out, however.)
What we need to know is: how does “the cabal” control the medical profession in such a way that Dr. Makis is “respectfully requesting” the CMA to deal with the vaccine issue?
I can tell you how the cabal prevented doctors from using very good cancer cures from the period 1890 to 2022 and continuing. They took over the medical schools and textbooks to pretend those cures did not exist. They arranged with state legislators to revoke the medical license of a recalcitrant doctor. How so? by each state giving “the profession” the right to say what constitutes acceptable practice. The AMA needs only one president nationally to ensure everyone is kept in line. (See my 2013 book Consider the Lilies: A Review of 18 Cures for Cancer.)
The Legal Profession and Its Similarity to Medical Profession
What about attorneys? I can reduce this section to a few words by saying that what the AMA does, the ABA — American Bar Association — also does. Many members of the public request the disbarment of bad lawyers but the persons in charge of disbarment are themselves part of the deal and often protect bad lawyers while punishing lawyers who go against the party line.
However, it’s not enough to show that a professional body prevents doctors and lawyers from doing the right thing. Doctors and lawyers prevent themselves from doing the right thing. That must be why they did not help us during the crisis.
Does this mean that doctors and lawyers are morally insufficient? Probably all humans are morally insufficient, but when it comes to being members of a group, one’s moral sufficiency may rise or fall based on the prescribed rules of the group. I am referring here to the emotional pull of loyalty. Members do not want to speak out against their bosses. It is considered disloyal to do so.
Loyalty is a deep human trait based on our attachment to kin and tribe. It easily gets transferred to one’s occupational group or one’s political party. I bet it does more harm than good. All that a cabal needs if it wants to institutionalize a bad thing is to “run” a few of its henchmen at the top of the group. The rest will follow like sheep.
There is also the normal human fear of standing up to the powerful. I have found, by working on court cases of family law in Australia, that lawyers, even lawyers who are mothers, do terrible things in child-custody cases. Often, they can plainly see that a child is being sex-trafficked yet pretend not to see it. They are under the sway of bad judges who might terminate their careers.
Also, they probably realize that thugs might get them. I quote the South Australian Speaker of the House, the late Peter Lewis (1949-2015):
“I [was] bringing some of the people who had made the allegations [about pedophiles] to the point where they might pluck up enough courage and confidence and swear the truth of those allegations, enabling them to be more carefully investigated. But they were being ‘bumped off’– that is, murdered and viciously assaulted – quicker than I could get them to write down their allegations.”
I don’t know how the profession of law — think of it, LAW — could fall so disgracefully. But please see an article by William Sumner Scott, entitled “The ABA and Legal Education.” (It is Appendix M in my 2022 book “Unreality: Sandy Hook Messes Minds.”) Scott points to ABA control over the accrediting of law schools, as well as their curriculum — a curriculum that doesn’t acknowledge the existence of judicial corruption.
The Journalist’s Profession
Search the Net for “Codes of Ethics for journalists,” and you will find some beautiful ones. They make such promises — or should I say they create such illusions — as to cause people to think that the profession has placed inhibitions on itself.
They give you the idea, for example, that they act to protect privacy, that they have sought out an opposite opinion to the one they are proclaiming so as to be fair and balanced. They famously claim to check out allegations by obtaining at least two sources for factual statements.
It’s not true. Editors of major newspapers or TV stations do not hold back ethically. They do what’s in their interest to do, including making up whole stories of “news” for entertainment purposes or more sinister purposes. If they give two sides to a story, they can use a straw man argument as one of the sides. They can neglect to show that a provider of newsy information has a vested interest in providing it.
Just as the cabal, I presume, got into the making of legislation, such that the AMA and ABA have certain privileges of regulating their members, so the cabal must have been behind the creation of the FCC, Federal Communications Commission. It controls electronic broadcasting by issuing licenses for bandwidth and sets “policy” for media. Let me quote a 2013 article by Chris Patterson and Seeta Gang at doi.org:
“Since the 1980s, it [the FCC] has taken much of the blame for the lack of diversity and the concentration of ownership in US broadcasting, the rise of media conglomerates, and pro-market regulation of Internet-related industries. The FCC has more responsibilities and autonomy than regulators in other industrialized countries.”
Beware autonomy of an agency — what is that doing in the US republic?
The Anti-Ethical Profession of the Intelligence Agencies
Now contemplate the marriage of the CIA and the media. The cabal is surely the hidden director of the five or six main media corporations, which in turn control the smaller news outlets. At first, the CIA, under a mission called “Operation Mockingbird,” endeavored to either bribe or intimidate the media to accomplish its purposes. But, as noted at the website CaitlinJohnstone.org: “What we are seeing now is the CIA openly acting AS the media. Any separation between the CIA and the news media, indeed even any pretense of separation, has been dropped.”
The CIA recruits from college campuses. I don’t know how they choose students who will not feel any ethical pressure to tell the truth or to be faithful to democracy, but they do. Caitlin Johnstone writes:
“Democracy has no meaningful existence if people’s votes aren’t being cast with a clear understanding of what’s happening in their nation and their world. And if their understanding is being shaped to suit the agendas of the very government they’re meant to be influencing with their votes, what you have is the most powerful military and economic force in the history of civilization with no accountability to the electorate whatsoever.”
Vive Granite Grok!
