Warning: The Truth May Shock You!  5G Is Military Grade Technology Was Created for Use as a Weapon and Surveillance


su_note note_color=”#efe1a7″ text_color=”#00000″ radius=”5”]Mark Steele, a weapons system expert, patent writer, inventor, and nuclear research technology officer said that 5G technology is a killer. He says it will intentionally disrupt and change the world if it is allowed to be rolled out. The goal is to have it completed by 2030. He says 5G is intended for more than surveillance, monitoring, social credit systems, crowd control, and mood and psychological control – it is a weapon. Technology is becoming something that we must interface with in order to access the world, and people can be locked out of the system. The choice to be addicted to technology lies with us.[/su_note]

Additional source:

“5G is a Weapons System, Nothing More, Nothing Less”: Technical Weapons Expert Mark Steele Issues Wake Up Call to All UK Residents on 5G LED Street Lights Rollout in Gateshead




The 1995 Oklahoma Bombing Is an Example of How Official ‘Science’ Is Deployed to Advance a Political Agenda

su_note note_color=”#efe1a7″ text_color=”#00000″ radius=”5”]On April 19, 1995, one-third of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City blew up, killing 169 people and wounding 680 others. Authorities reported that the explosion was due to ammonium nitrate bombs. However, two years later, the DOJ determined that the FBI crime laboratory working on the case made ‘scientifically unsound’ conclusions that were ‘biased in favor of the prosecution’. The evidence for ammonium nitrate bombs as the main cause of the explosions was declared “inappropriate”. Three men were arrested and convicted: Tim McVeigh, who was put to death in 2001, Terry Nichols, who is serving multiple life sentences, and Michael Fortier, who was sentenced to 12 years in prison. The crooked science pushed by the FBI lab was permitted to stand—despite exposure as fraud—and the false story of militia terrorists trying to bring down the federal government was allowed to stand as well.[/su_note]

The public wants to buy every official scientific claim the mainstream press pounds into their brains—whether the issue is vaccine safety, global warming, the “overwhelming success” of medical drugs, the Big Bang theory of the universe’s origin…

For most people, the notion that a political agenda underlies such scientific pronouncements is unthinkable.

So as an example, a very specific example of fake science, let’s look back at the attack on Oklahoma City.

On April 19, 1995, one-third of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City blew up, killing 169 people and wounding 680 others.

Three men were arrested and convicted: Tim McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Michael Fortier. McVeigh was put to death on June 11, 2001, Nichols is currently serving multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole, and Fortier was sentenced to 12 years (he served that term and was released).

The official narrative of the bombing stated: A Ryder truck parked at the curb outside the Murrah Building contained barrels of ammonium nitrate plus fuel oil (ANFO bombs), and their coordinated explosion occurred shortly after 9AM on the morning of April 19th.

In addition to the deaths and the woundings, the explosion impacted 324 buildings and 86 cars in the area.

(In my 1995, book, “The Oklahoma City Bombing, the Suppressed Truth,” I laid to rest the claim that ANFO bombs could have caused that much damage; and more importantly, I showed that an explosion coming out of a Ryder truck at the curb could not have caused the particular profile of damage sustained by the Murrah Building.)

The vaunted FBI lab decided that, indeed, all the damage and death HAD been caused by ANFO bombs in the Ryder truck.

But wait.

Buckle up.

Two years after the bombing, on March 22, 1997, we had this from CNN: “The Justice Department inspector general’s office has determined that the FBI crime laboratory working on the Oklahoma City bombing case made ‘scientifically unsound’ conclusions that were ‘biased in favor of the prosecution,’ The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.”

“…[FBI] supervisors approved lab reports that they ‘cannot support’ and…FBI lab officials may have erred about the size of the blast, the amount of explosives involved and the type of explosives used in the bombing[!].”

“…harshest criticism was of David Williams, a supervisory agent in the [FBI] explosives unit, the paper [LA Times] said. Those flaws reportedly include the basis of his determination that the main charge of the explosion was ammonium nitrate. The inspector general called such a determination ‘inappropriate,’ the Times said.”

“…FBI officials found a receipt for ammonium nitrate at defendant [Terry] Nichols’ home and, because of that discovery, Williams slanted his conclusion to match the evidence.”

And with those revelations, the case, the investigation, the court trials, and press probes should have taken a whole new direction. But they didn’t.

The fake science was allowed to stand.

Therefore, other paths of investigation were abandoned. If bombs did, in fact, explode in the Ryder truck, but didn’t cause the major damage, then those bombs were a cover for other explosions of separate origin—for example, charges wired inside the columns of the Murrah Building, triggered at the exact moment the Ryder Truck explosion occurred.

Now we would be talking about a very sophisticated operation, far beyond the technical skills of McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier.

Who knows where an honest in-depth investigation would have led? The whole idea of anti-government militia terrorism in the OKC attack—symbolized by McVeigh—was used by President Bill Clinton to bring the frightened public “back to the federal government” as their ultimate protector and savior.

Instead, the public might have been treated to a true story about a false flag operation, in which case President Clinton’s massaged message would never have been delivered.

Read full article here…




Canada: Lawyers Launch $500 Million Class-Action Lawsuit Against Monsanto/ Bayer, the Manufacturer of RoundUp Weed Killer

A Canadian law firm, representing 60 plaintiffs who allege that RoundUp weed killer caused their illnesses that include cancer, has filed a $500 million class-action lawsuit against pharmaceutical company Bayer, the owner of Roundup manufacturer, Monsanto. The plaintiffs are looking for financial compensation and “behaviour modification” in the form of large settlements to discourage other companies from bad business practices. In the United States alone, there have been about 18,000 lawsuits filed against the makers of Roundup.

Weed killer contains herbicide glyphosate, alleged to cause cancer

Diamond & Diamond, a national personal injury law firm in Canada, is spearheading a $500 million class-action lawsuit against various Roundup makers, including pharmaceutical company Bayer, the owner of Roundup maker Monsanto.  

Roundup is a weedkiller that contains glyphosate, a herbicide chemical often used by homeowners to treat their lawns. 

There have been many lawsuits filed across North America alleging that glyphosate can cause health problems including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a type of cancer that affects the lymphatic system.

In the United States alone, there have been about 18,000 lawsuits filed against the makers of Roundup.

Diamond & Diamond is calling this Canada’s largest class-action lawsuit against Roundup makers. There are currently more than 60 individuals named as plaintiffs, but the firm said they believe thousands may have been affected.

This year, there have already been lawsuits against Roundup manufacturers filed in B.C., Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. This one would be the first class action in Canada and follows the likes of class-action lawsuits filed in the U.S.

Darryl Singer, the head of commercial and civil litigation at Diamond & Diamond, said the plaintiffs involved in this class-action lawsuit are looking not only for financial compensation, but also what he calls “behaviour modification” so that the same thing doesn’t happen again in the future with other products in Canada.

“If there’s not these lawsuits that force companies like Monsanto to write these big cheques, they have no incentive to change the way they do business,” Singer said.

Singer said the plaintiffs have also been diagnosed with other forms of cancer, like brain and lung cancer, and some of his clients are acting on behalf of an estate. 

Read full article here…