I just wanted to say thank you for saving me a ton of time with your insightful commentary on the negative ramifications of this Orwellian program. Of note, I hadn't realized this program found its genesis in conjunction with election issues, I had assumed it was birthed specifically to address COVID misinformation. I suppose a salient take-away might be that the mechanisms of tyranny are versatile in their application. I look forward to following your work going forward, take care!
Thanks Grant. We need as many medical people on this side of reality. It's shocking to me how physicians have allowed their rights to be undermined by the AMA and numerous attorney generals. Physicians no longer are allowed to use their years of experience and best judgement with each patient when deciding their care. Again, who the hell would have imagined this could ever happen in America. I suspect you're getting creamed by most of your friends in health care settings. Thanks for what you're doing.
Feb 1, 2022·edited Feb 1, 2022Liked by Michelle Rabin Ph. D.
I wrote an article speculating why I believe this to be the case in the Army (bureaucracy) but I believe strongly it also applies to other institutions such as the AMA and the licensure apparatus. Most of my colleagues have been exceptionally respectful, and also often agreeable, but seem terribly afraid to speak out in what feels like an effort to avoid the "eye of sauron" (the attention of some authoritarian bureaucrat thirsting for the blood of non-believers). One of my closest friends said that I should lose my license early on when I expressed skepticism over the vaccine rollout, so maybe I've just chosen the people I discuss this issue with more carefully since then. In any case it heartens me that we, two individuals with significantly divergent beliefs, are able to align in this fight against the slow march to tyranny in the hope of returning to a world where we can disagree with each other without fear of an existential threat to our livelihoods.
For those of you discovering this late like me, the docs the FDA WERE finally forced to start releasing in March were even more hair-raising - yet I've seen next to nothing on it since this report in The Hill in April: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eJ5TIT6zvk&ab_channel=TheHill Wth??
Thanks for your great reporting, Michelle. I would add to all the fine the commentary that it's time we reject the Orwellian term, "misinformation." Like "extremism" it has no meaning except what the politically powerful will attach to it, and obscures the search for truth. The definition you unearthed that it applies to "false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive" (especially spread by those really bad people whose voices we must silence) gives up the game. What's the opposite of "misinformation?" "Misinformation" doesn't mean false it means not politically correct, not approved. Things are true or false and all the messy gradations in between as society fights to discover the former.
Hello Michelle from Scotland. I am seeking to piece together all the bits of the jigsaw that have brought us to where we are now. I started with what is THE GREAT RESET and then to the TRUSTED NEWS INITIATIVE. I so appreciate your article - really incisive. Another piece I kind of got yesterday is the Agenda 2030. A young man on TikTok was saying that each major country/city has a plan for 2030 aligned to the UN Global Goals for Sustainable Development. Another opportunity for what is ostensibly a good thing to be hikjacked into global control. Real scary. cheers
Hello Ann from Scotland. Now that's a country that's on my bucket list:) Thanks for all your efforts. We need everyone to take action and investigate, such as you're doing, if we're going to turn this around. Too many sheep passively going to slaughter. I have never felt this frightened at any other time in my life.
Hello Michelle (.. my belle) for sharing all those informations. From a montrealer perspective, it would look like the AFP ( Agence France Presse ) needed some competition ! : - ) Fredx
As you know, this was written in December 2021 so we know that there was fraud in the returns. The consequences of Trump's involvement is obvious. It appears that he will always have some advantages as there is a reluctance to prosecute a former president. Perhaps we'll have to allow karma to do its thing:)
The BBC is a £5B/pa 20k staff broadcaster, funded by compulsion on anyone who seeks to watch live TV of any form in the UK. It used to be OK across the board, but is now dire under any category except, perhaps, natural history, though the #28Gate impositions have seen agenda shoehorned in there too.
The worst is its news, rather hilariously currently being 'sold' on social media as a benchmark of trust and integrity. The theory seems to be to keep saying it until it becomes true. It is not. Almost any aspect of coverage is run through a filter, and either reshaped in the edit suite or quietly dropped if it does not suit. Omission is potent and main technique. As it using 'allegation' by 'sources' that was valid if trustworthy and with good record, but no longer.
Expressing concern or pointing out inaccuracy is cause for blocking or banning. That is censorship to complement the propaganda. There was an internal complaints system, headed by the quaintly inaccurate 'BBC Trust', that oversaw anything from viewers that could get through the labyrinth that is the complaints system, with a mid stage run by 'directors' at the Editorial Complaints Unit. The Trust has now gone as it was a joke. ECU remains. Now the only avenue is OFCOM, in theory also remote and impartial but staffed by ex BBC employees and likewise useless at holding this considerable power, and its abuses, to account.
Given the budget, and scope, and spread, globally, that is a real problem, especially now.
It brags of 'partners' on matters US that include CNN, WaPo, NYT... which may explain much but excuses little. The ex-head of their 'disinformation unit' here, Mike Wendling, is now a correspondent in the US. Most reports sent this side of the Atlantic currently involves protecting poor governance obvious to all by steering clear, and disparaging perceived threats to their control of the news flow.
I would have to agree Jacquelyn. This is beyond unacceptable. How it continues to happen in the U.S.A. is impossible to wrap my brain around.
Greetings! I searched for TNI in duck duck go and found your article. I was hoping to not have to explain the insidious nature of this initiative when I referenced it in an article I wrote a couple days ago: https://grantesmith.substack.com/p/covid-19-vaccine-refusal-an-alternative
I just wanted to say thank you for saving me a ton of time with your insightful commentary on the negative ramifications of this Orwellian program. Of note, I hadn't realized this program found its genesis in conjunction with election issues, I had assumed it was birthed specifically to address COVID misinformation. I suppose a salient take-away might be that the mechanisms of tyranny are versatile in their application. I look forward to following your work going forward, take care!
Thanks Grant. We need as many medical people on this side of reality. It's shocking to me how physicians have allowed their rights to be undermined by the AMA and numerous attorney generals. Physicians no longer are allowed to use their years of experience and best judgement with each patient when deciding their care. Again, who the hell would have imagined this could ever happen in America. I suspect you're getting creamed by most of your friends in health care settings. Thanks for what you're doing.
I wrote an article speculating why I believe this to be the case in the Army (bureaucracy) but I believe strongly it also applies to other institutions such as the AMA and the licensure apparatus. Most of my colleagues have been exceptionally respectful, and also often agreeable, but seem terribly afraid to speak out in what feels like an effort to avoid the "eye of sauron" (the attention of some authoritarian bureaucrat thirsting for the blood of non-believers). One of my closest friends said that I should lose my license early on when I expressed skepticism over the vaccine rollout, so maybe I've just chosen the people I discuss this issue with more carefully since then. In any case it heartens me that we, two individuals with significantly divergent beliefs, are able to align in this fight against the slow march to tyranny in the hope of returning to a world where we can disagree with each other without fear of an existential threat to our livelihoods.
For those of you discovering this late like me, the docs the FDA WERE finally forced to start releasing in March were even more hair-raising - yet I've seen next to nothing on it since this report in The Hill in April: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eJ5TIT6zvk&ab_channel=TheHill Wth??
Thanks for your great reporting, Michelle. I would add to all the fine the commentary that it's time we reject the Orwellian term, "misinformation." Like "extremism" it has no meaning except what the politically powerful will attach to it, and obscures the search for truth. The definition you unearthed that it applies to "false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive" (especially spread by those really bad people whose voices we must silence) gives up the game. What's the opposite of "misinformation?" "Misinformation" doesn't mean false it means not politically correct, not approved. Things are true or false and all the messy gradations in between as society fights to discover the former.
Well said Michael. It is tragic that we've allowed politics to intrude in such life and death circumstances.
Isn't it called the Busted News Initiative? They all busted, all 3 meanings of busted.
I agree. Imagine that.
Hello Michelle from Scotland. I am seeking to piece together all the bits of the jigsaw that have brought us to where we are now. I started with what is THE GREAT RESET and then to the TRUSTED NEWS INITIATIVE. I so appreciate your article - really incisive. Another piece I kind of got yesterday is the Agenda 2030. A young man on TikTok was saying that each major country/city has a plan for 2030 aligned to the UN Global Goals for Sustainable Development. Another opportunity for what is ostensibly a good thing to be hikjacked into global control. Real scary. cheers
Hello Ann from Scotland. Now that's a country that's on my bucket list:) Thanks for all your efforts. We need everyone to take action and investigate, such as you're doing, if we're going to turn this around. Too many sheep passively going to slaughter. I have never felt this frightened at any other time in my life.
Hello Michelle (.. my belle) for sharing all those informations. From a montrealer perspective, it would look like the AFP ( Agence France Presse ) needed some competition ! : - ) Fredx
@MichelleRabinPhD I really enjoyed the whole article, One question.
I REALLY HOPE YOU DIDN'T BET THE FARM ON TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS SHOWING ANYTHNG, PLEASE TEL ME YO DIDN'T DO THAT?
As you know, this was written in December 2021 so we know that there was fraud in the returns. The consequences of Trump's involvement is obvious. It appears that he will always have some advantages as there is a reluctance to prosecute a former president. Perhaps we'll have to allow karma to do its thing:)
The BBC is a £5B/pa 20k staff broadcaster, funded by compulsion on anyone who seeks to watch live TV of any form in the UK. It used to be OK across the board, but is now dire under any category except, perhaps, natural history, though the #28Gate impositions have seen agenda shoehorned in there too.
The worst is its news, rather hilariously currently being 'sold' on social media as a benchmark of trust and integrity. The theory seems to be to keep saying it until it becomes true. It is not. Almost any aspect of coverage is run through a filter, and either reshaped in the edit suite or quietly dropped if it does not suit. Omission is potent and main technique. As it using 'allegation' by 'sources' that was valid if trustworthy and with good record, but no longer.
Expressing concern or pointing out inaccuracy is cause for blocking or banning. That is censorship to complement the propaganda. There was an internal complaints system, headed by the quaintly inaccurate 'BBC Trust', that oversaw anything from viewers that could get through the labyrinth that is the complaints system, with a mid stage run by 'directors' at the Editorial Complaints Unit. The Trust has now gone as it was a joke. ECU remains. Now the only avenue is OFCOM, in theory also remote and impartial but staffed by ex BBC employees and likewise useless at holding this considerable power, and its abuses, to account.
Given the budget, and scope, and spread, globally, that is a real problem, especially now.
It brags of 'partners' on matters US that include CNN, WaPo, NYT... which may explain much but excuses little. The ex-head of their 'disinformation unit' here, Mike Wendling, is now a correspondent in the US. Most reports sent this side of the Atlantic currently involves protecting poor governance obvious to all by steering clear, and disparaging perceived threats to their control of the news flow.
Great article. I am also writing a piece on the TNI.