These are all distractions . Somebody has to control the media game, especially with all the flow of fiat money to the top of the pyramid. My question would be : Who controls the Law ? What's the role of the BAR aka "The Crown Corporation " . How come our rights are irrelevant ? Is it because we don't know how NOT to contract/consent ? What medium are they using to make us all of their offers ?
I agree, there are many levels to the structures by which society is manipulated. Another is the banking system (in particular the principle of fractional reserve banking and the means of control / ownership (the Fed at the very least is privately owned and controlled), of central banks - including the IMF, which is 'central bank to the central banks). And as you say, law. Nonetheles, I think it imporrant that more people come to realise that the media industry is not there to keep them informed, and that on a global basis it is all controlled by the same people. Coming back to the law probem, there has been quite a bit of information coming out over recent years about the role of maritime law in the manipulations, the way that corporations have been set up which become proxies for countries, and the way that a 'straw man' legal entity is created as a manipulable 'stand in' for an actual human being through the birth certificate process. And the various tricks that are used to get the consent from us that is needed for there to be actual power in those things. It's not one of the areas where I have a lot of references at my fingertips (nor a great knowledge of the intricacies) but one source that's been on may radar in recent weeks has been a series of videos made by Richard Vobes:
The media is constructed to keep us In - Formed ie to keep us attached /bound within the Form of the law to have juristiction over us. The mediias role is to keep offering us offers so that we'll address those offers and therefore become bound. Showing knowledge can be detrimental to our freedom!
What we need to learn is how to not consent. It's impossible to avoid contracting as any word(idea) that comes forth from us is an offer to contract ( hear my word, follow my belief). This communication to you is an offer to contract. If you respond by addressing my belief and don't know how to lawfully rescind/rebut my offer then I could assume you've consented. Kurt Kallenbachs research is very educational on this subject. ( New Word Order at Podbean)
I came here from the link you posted in my comments section. Your comment there should be it’s own post as it has lots of juicy points. I was hoping to see more in this post about complex theory, the psychopathic practical comms, and how “evil” as a force puppeteers men’s actions. But I do appreciate the reminder of how ubiquitous control in media is. My only pushback is that although top down control in media is too entrenched in the hands of private powerful interests, with the advent of some new technologies, each of us carry a printing press in our own back pocket. There’s lots of power in decentralized numbers. Here we are, communicating peer to peer and maybe there’s someone pulling our strings, but doubtful, and in any case, too many of us for all to have a handler and we seem to be incentivized to stand up to evil forces. So although organized media is controlled, we can think of ourselves as media nodes too and they can’t control us all.
Regarding 'Government by Media', I agree that we currently have unprecendented possibility for direct peer to peer communication. It's what I love about Substack, and I thank you for your engagement with me in that respect! There is also however quite a danger of 'centralised forces' shutting that down, as digital comms can be equallly powerful and a centralising or descentralising force! As you say though, a lot of people are currently very incentivized to stand up to evil, and – irrespective of digital surveillance and censorship - no, nobody can control everything for ever. I'd say we're at a kind of 'irresistible force meets immovable object moment'. Let's stay on the case!
Appreciate that this piece is rather simple in its message, but I have a pretty mixed audience, and while the likes of you and I are very away of the massive manipulation and orchestration of the 'mainstream media', huge numbers of people have no idea the extent of it, and can't believe it could be as bad as 'some say'. So I wanted here just to give a straight and factual account of the background to that.
I'll repsond a little further back over on your site.
Yes, indeed. The public need the inferential steps necessary to make the leaps w’re already at, resisting the powers that be in our own individual way. I appreciate the links and will comb through them. Thanks for engaging!
What about Springer, which is about equal in size to Elsevier? These corporations have a great business model. They get all their content for free from unpaid authors, they provide almost no services in terms of production or editing (which is all done by unpaid or low paid members of journal boards) and they either force libraries to buy their publication subscriptions--or else lose online access to all the journals whose subscriptions they paid for previously, or they force governments to pay for open access. It's almost all profit. And it's all about quantity not quality.
Yes, Springer was one of the few substantial enterprises I found for which control / ownership is still (at least notionally) outside of the structures I listed, being majority owned by Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, controlled by the Holtzbrinck family. (Holtzbrinck is also extensively involved in educaiton). Nonetheless your comment - I guess from personal experience? - further underscores the shocking realisation that the business of publishing scientific papers is globally controlled by 'interests', just like media, entertainment and education.
For me one of the most potent quotes of the 'covid years' was from Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, former Chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz (and like so many other world-class scientists widely censored and smeared by those who have agendas other than 'the science'):
"Let's not be niave -science is a corrupt as politics".
It's astonishing to me how many people are either a) not willing to see the media monopoly as you've laid it out so beautifully here; or b) not willing to believe that that concentration of media ownership has any effect whatsoever on the accuracy or content of what we read, think, and watch. Stunning. Thanks for this, Michael.
Our existence doesn't commence at conception, it begins at fertilization. This is very important to know. Check out Kurt Kallenbachs research on this fact and how it relates to Law. ( New Word Order on Podbean)
Thréad his viewpoints with an open mind. It will challenge lots of deeply held beliefs that have us attached to the Matrix. He's done a lot of groundbreaking work in relation to the law construct. It's akin to swallowing Black's law dictionary along with Webster etc and joining all the dots. If you stay with it long enough it starts to make sense.
These are all distractions . Somebody has to control the media game, especially with all the flow of fiat money to the top of the pyramid. My question would be : Who controls the Law ? What's the role of the BAR aka "The Crown Corporation " . How come our rights are irrelevant ? Is it because we don't know how NOT to contract/consent ? What medium are they using to make us all of their offers ?
I agree, there are many levels to the structures by which society is manipulated. Another is the banking system (in particular the principle of fractional reserve banking and the means of control / ownership (the Fed at the very least is privately owned and controlled), of central banks - including the IMF, which is 'central bank to the central banks). And as you say, law. Nonetheles, I think it imporrant that more people come to realise that the media industry is not there to keep them informed, and that on a global basis it is all controlled by the same people. Coming back to the law probem, there has been quite a bit of information coming out over recent years about the role of maritime law in the manipulations, the way that corporations have been set up which become proxies for countries, and the way that a 'straw man' legal entity is created as a manipulable 'stand in' for an actual human being through the birth certificate process. And the various tricks that are used to get the consent from us that is needed for there to be actual power in those things. It's not one of the areas where I have a lot of references at my fingertips (nor a great knowledge of the intricacies) but one source that's been on may radar in recent weeks has been a series of videos made by Richard Vobes:
'How the Legal System Takes Advantage of You'
https://youtu.be/k4Q71qmhjYM?si=PKdU-NWT7b0jmT6O
'You're Far Richer Than You Realise'
https://youtu.be/_w37xNyyx94?si=X2IxIA8LVwyYzXZG
'Their Rules only Apply if You Consent'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z72nlDM63mE&list=RDCMUC26rZ7qgVN4yDfFzLGft-AQ&start_radio=1
The media is constructed to keep us In - Formed ie to keep us attached /bound within the Form of the law to have juristiction over us. The mediias role is to keep offering us offers so that we'll address those offers and therefore become bound. Showing knowledge can be detrimental to our freedom!
What we need to learn is how to not consent. It's impossible to avoid contracting as any word(idea) that comes forth from us is an offer to contract ( hear my word, follow my belief). This communication to you is an offer to contract. If you respond by addressing my belief and don't know how to lawfully rescind/rebut my offer then I could assume you've consented. Kurt Kallenbachs research is very educational on this subject. ( New Word Order at Podbean)
I came here from the link you posted in my comments section. Your comment there should be it’s own post as it has lots of juicy points. I was hoping to see more in this post about complex theory, the psychopathic practical comms, and how “evil” as a force puppeteers men’s actions. But I do appreciate the reminder of how ubiquitous control in media is. My only pushback is that although top down control in media is too entrenched in the hands of private powerful interests, with the advent of some new technologies, each of us carry a printing press in our own back pocket. There’s lots of power in decentralized numbers. Here we are, communicating peer to peer and maybe there’s someone pulling our strings, but doubtful, and in any case, too many of us for all to have a handler and we seem to be incentivized to stand up to evil forces. So although organized media is controlled, we can think of ourselves as media nodes too and they can’t control us all.
Thanks for a very interesting dive.
Hi Tonika, thanks for your comments!
Regarding the hunger for more on 'complexity', and 'evil as the puppet-master' etc...
For the former you'll find a little more at:
https://michaelwarden.substack.com/p/a-cure-for-21st-century-madness
and for the latter at:
https://michaelwarden.substack.com/p/zeitgeist
and
https://michaelwarden.substack.com/p/the-problem-of-mass-psychosis
Regarding 'Government by Media', I agree that we currently have unprecendented possibility for direct peer to peer communication. It's what I love about Substack, and I thank you for your engagement with me in that respect! There is also however quite a danger of 'centralised forces' shutting that down, as digital comms can be equallly powerful and a centralising or descentralising force! As you say though, a lot of people are currently very incentivized to stand up to evil, and – irrespective of digital surveillance and censorship - no, nobody can control everything for ever. I'd say we're at a kind of 'irresistible force meets immovable object moment'. Let's stay on the case!
Appreciate that this piece is rather simple in its message, but I have a pretty mixed audience, and while the likes of you and I are very away of the massive manipulation and orchestration of the 'mainstream media', huge numbers of people have no idea the extent of it, and can't believe it could be as bad as 'some say'. So I wanted here just to give a straight and factual account of the background to that.
I'll repsond a little further back over on your site.
Yes, indeed. The public need the inferential steps necessary to make the leaps w’re already at, resisting the powers that be in our own individual way. I appreciate the links and will comb through them. Thanks for engaging!
Great work! Found you via your comment at https://devanneykathleen.substack.com/p/to-kill-a-mockingbird-media/
Many thanks for the feedback Jerome! (Got something else on the publishing world coming soon).
What about Springer, which is about equal in size to Elsevier? These corporations have a great business model. They get all their content for free from unpaid authors, they provide almost no services in terms of production or editing (which is all done by unpaid or low paid members of journal boards) and they either force libraries to buy their publication subscriptions--or else lose online access to all the journals whose subscriptions they paid for previously, or they force governments to pay for open access. It's almost all profit. And it's all about quantity not quality.
Yes, Springer was one of the few substantial enterprises I found for which control / ownership is still (at least notionally) outside of the structures I listed, being majority owned by Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, controlled by the Holtzbrinck family. (Holtzbrinck is also extensively involved in educaiton). Nonetheless your comment - I guess from personal experience? - further underscores the shocking realisation that the business of publishing scientific papers is globally controlled by 'interests', just like media, entertainment and education.
For me one of the most potent quotes of the 'covid years' was from Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, former Chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz (and like so many other world-class scientists widely censored and smeared by those who have agendas other than 'the science'):
"Let's not be niave -science is a corrupt as politics".
It's astonishing to me how many people are either a) not willing to see the media monopoly as you've laid it out so beautifully here; or b) not willing to believe that that concentration of media ownership has any effect whatsoever on the accuracy or content of what we read, think, and watch. Stunning. Thanks for this, Michael.
Why is our Birth date so important to the law system, when they know that is not the beginning of our existence ?
Great question! I've often wondered why we don't count our existence from our conception.
Our existence doesn't commence at conception, it begins at fertilization. This is very important to know. Check out Kurt Kallenbachs research on this fact and how it relates to Law. ( New Word Order on Podbean)
Thanks for the reference Sean, I iwll check it out.
Thréad his viewpoints with an open mind. It will challenge lots of deeply held beliefs that have us attached to the Matrix. He's done a lot of groundbreaking work in relation to the law construct. It's akin to swallowing Black's law dictionary along with Webster etc and joining all the dots. If you stay with it long enough it starts to make sense.