It’s 1984

First edition cover:  Wikipedia

Recently, social media and numerous media outlets have banned alternative health sources.  

A few examples:

Healthnut News

GreenMedinfo:  **Update** Pinterest allows kids aged 13 and up unrestricted access to sexually explicit and violent images linked directly to hardcore pornography sites, but won’t allow alternative health news.


Conservative news:

The media outlets typically state it’s because the alternative media sources have violated a “misinformation” policy, or they don’t give a reason at all.

This is quite interesting because there are many areas of health/life where the jury is still out, and without public awareness, dialogue, and debate, serious issues will never be acknowledged or addressed.  To state another viewpoint is “misinformation” doesn’t stick because if you can back it up (which these sources do) then you may not like it, you may even disagree with it, but it’s another opinion in the wide-world of opinions.  And the last time I checked, this is what America was built upon – a diversity of opinions and the ability to make informed choices.

Lyme/MSIDS is a perfect example.

Anyone in Lymeland understands that those who have been holding the power for over 40 years have controlled the narrative with an iron fist.  The folks willing to put their necks on the line and counter this narrative are few and far between, yet, if you look for it, you can find the true story – the years of denial, abuse, flawed and biased science, and yes, even the discovery that our government tweaks pathogens within ticks in a lab.

Yes, I said it, because they did it.  In this 1967 U.S. Army report, we find starting on page 600, ticks that were experimentally infected with various pathogens.  For instance, on page 301 that Boophilus australis was experimentally infected with murine typhus rickettsia.  Dermacentor albopiotus with spotted fever, Dermacentor andersoni with typhus rickettsiae, and so on and so forth.

This is not the only place I’ve read about tick experimentation.

In PJ Langhoff’s book, “God Science: The Secret World of Rampant Genetics, Hidden Illness, and Biotech Profiteering,” she details how as a kid in Illinois, she and her siblings heard a radio announcer state that researchers from a nearby facility were going to drop items from an airplane and that people were to leave these items alone and let the researchers collect them.  Shortly after, every kid in the neighborhood was out hunting.  PJ first found a boring piece of cloth which she left, but after that found an interesting capsule that had broken open upon impact.  Funny looking bugs were crawling out of it.  Bugs she didn’t recognize.  She developed a perfect bullseye rash, went to doctor after doctor who had no idea what it was, went from a straight A student to a struggling student, and the rest is history with her struggling with chronic/persistent symptoms ever since.  I highly recommend her book.  FYI:  Years later she attempted to obtain the “official” information on this tick drop and it was scrubbed from existence yet all her siblings remember it as if it was yesterday.

What on earth were they dropping ticks for?

There’s more sources I could present, but I distress….

Which brings us back to the issue at hand:  Censorship of opinions that don’t fit the narrative.

In George Orwell’s prophetic 1984, the ruling party controls everything – including thoughts considered rebellious, called Thoughtcrime.  They even developed a new language called Newspeak which eliminated all words remotely related to rebellion.

Ironically, the main character works in the Ministry of Truth where historical records are altered to fit the needs of the Party.

Everyone in the the world of 1984 lives in fear.

Maybe like this?

I won’t spoil the end for those of you who haven’t read it, but you may just wake up one day and discover you are living in 1984.

For the answer to this tyranny, I quote British philosopher John Stuart Mill’s inaugural address of 1867:

“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”