December 26, 2022

Ice Age Coming? Incredible scenes of chaos in snowy Japan!

source

ND News

42.5K subscribers

168,372 views  Dec 26, 2022

Heavy snowfall hit Japan early last week.
A record amount of snow fell in the southern part of the Tohoku region and in Niigata Prefecture on the coast of the Sea of Japan.
The winter atmospheric pressure regime and strong cold air currents led to heavy snowfalls in the Hokuriku and Tohoku regions, as well as in Niigata Prefecture.
Heavy snowfall has already claimed the lives of at least eight people.
Officials said the eight deaths occurred in five prefectures - Hokkaido, Akita, Yamagata, Niigata and Ishikawa.
A woman in her 20s was found dead in a snow-covered car in Niigata Prefecture last Tuesday.
Officials suspected she died of carbon monoxide poisoning after the car's exhaust was clogged with snow.
Three people over 80 have died in accidents in Niigata Prefecture while trying to clear snow around their homes.
In northern Japan's Akita Prefecture, a man in his 80s was found dead last Wednesday, buried under the snow.
Another man, aged 70, died in the prefecture while trying to clear the roof of his house of snow on Monday.
Officials added that 19 people were seriously injured and 26 had minor injuries in snow-related accidents.
Forecasters warn that more snow is expected, as well as warnings of possible traffic disruptions and the need to be careful when clearing snow from rooftops.
The city of Tadami in Fukushima prefecture received a record 110 cm of snow in 24 hours, and the village of Okura in Yamagata prefecture received a record 101 cm of snow.
In the city of Uonuma in Niigata Prefecture, 95 cm of snow fell.
Snow depth was about 2.2 meters in Okura and over 1.8 meters in Uonuma.
In the city of Niigata on the Sea of Japan, 43 cm of snow fell per day.
The city of Nagaoka in Niigata Prefecture also recorded a record 24-hour snowfall of 89 cm.
Both are monthly records for December.
In some areas, the amount of snowfall exceeded the seasonal average by more than three times.
Basically in the same prefecture, the Hokuriku and Banetsu expressways were closed in some sections.
There are interruptions in cellular communications and electricity in the region.
17 thousand houses are de-energized.
In Niigata Prefecture, a traffic jam has formed that stretches for 20 km.
Special equipment was sent to clear the road.
Rescuers also organized the distribution of food, water, blankets and fuel.
Some western cities experienced record snowfall.
These include the main western island of Shikoku, Okuizumo in Shimane Prefecture, and Kitahiroshima and Shobara in Hiroshima Prefecture.
Engaru in Hokkaido, Japan's northernmost main island, resumed record snowfall in December, registering more than 80 cm of snow in 24 hours.
The meteorological agency warned residents of Ishikawa Prefecture that they could be harmed by the traffic violation.
Some bullet trains in the Kanazawa prefectural capital were briefly stopped due to heavy snowfall.
Japan Airlines canceled 59 flights and All Nippon Airways canceled 41.
Japan is currently under winter pressure, with the meteorological agency warning of snowstorms and high waves.
The Japan Meteorological Agency said it expects inclement weather to continue into Tuesday, moving from the north and east of the country to the west.
Forecasters are asking residents to closely monitor the latest weather reports.

dioskourosnews.com

BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

Couldn't Be Worse News: The Genetic Code from the C19 Shots Could Be Passed Down from Parent to Child

Published December 26, 2022

video

https://rumble.com/v22hpf4-couldnt-be-worse-news-the-genetic-code-for-the-c19-shots-could-be-passed-do.html

source

The Vigilant Fox

https://rumble.com/c/VigilantFox.

"The genetic code, once people take these vaccines, is long-lasting. It may indeed get into the nucleus, change the human genome, and then pass down to daughter cells," stated Dr. McCullough

"That means that this could actually be passed down to the progeny of vaccinated young parents. There couldn't be worse news right now."

Dr. Peter A. McCullough is a world-renowned MD — fighting against censorship and reprisal. He has teamed up with The Wellness Company, where he now serves as Chief Scientific Officer.

https://twc.health/vfox

dioskourosnews.com

BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

It's starting, Bill Gates announces the next pandemic date and outbreak location | Redacted News

#redacted #claytonmorris #natalimorris

It's starting, Bill Gates announces the next pandemic date and outbreak

location | Redacted News

source

Redacted

1.55M subscribers

231,335 views  Dec 26, 2022

Well Bill Gates and the WHO have ran a simulation of the next pandemic, coming soon to a government near you in 2025. The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation conducted another pandemic tabletop exercise in Brussels, Belgium, on October 23, 2022. The phenomenon is dubbed SEERS, Severe Epidemic Enterovirus Respiratory Syndrome 2025. You ready?

dioskourosnews.com

BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

Why We Fight: The Nazis Strike

source

US National Archives

390K subscribers

144,597 views  Jan 23, 2015

Creator(s): Department of Defense. Department of the Army. Office of the Chief Signal Officer. 9/18/1947-2/28/1964  (Most Recent)
Series: Orientation Films, 1942 - 1949
Record Group 111: Records of the Office of the Chief Signal Officer, 1860 - 1985

Production Date: 1943
Other Title(s): Orientation Film, No. 2
Production Series: Title: Why We Fight
General Note(s):"Orientation Films" is the series description within Record Group 111.

Scope & Content: This motion picture film covers the growth of German aggression, 1934-1940. Contains many animated maps explaining German tactics and many views of Adolf Hitler making speeches and in conferences. Reel 1 shows a large Nazi rally and Axis-inspired riots in Belgium and France. Also shows a Nazi rally in Madison Square Garden. Included is footage of Joachim von Ribbentrop and Fritz Kuhn. Reel 2 shows the mobilization of industry and manpower, including paratroop training. Footage shows the Rhineland invaded and the Siegfried Line constructed and manned. In Reel 3, Germany captures Austria and Czechoslovakia, and footage shows Neville Chamberlain and Edouard Daladier at the Munich Conference; Chamberlain reports on the talks. Footage also shows President Eduard Benes. In Reel 4, the Polish campaign begins. Shown are scenes of Luftwaffe activities and of comparative German and Polish military strength. The reel includes views of the Moscow Conference. In Reel 5, Warsaw is besieged and captured, and masses of Polish soldiers are captured. Footage shows the suffering of Polish citizens, Russia capturing East Poland, and British planes bombing German ships in the Kiel Canal.

Contact(s): National Archives at College Park - Motion Pictures (RD-DC-M), National Archives at College Park, 8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20740-6001
Phone: 301-837-3540, Fax: 301-837-3620, Email: mopix@nara.gov

National Archives Identifier: 36068
Local Identifier: 111-OF-2

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/36068

dioskourosnews.com

BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

Disinformation, Censorship, and Information Warfare in the 21st Century

By Michael Senger

All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War

DECEMBER 26, 2022

In recent years, prominent national security officials and media outlets have raised alarm about the unprecedented effects of foreign disinformation in democratic countries. In practice, what they mean is that democratic governments have fallen behind in their command of the methods of information warfare in the early 21st century. As outlined herein, while information warfare is a real and serious issue facing democratic governments in the 21st century, the war on disinformation, as currently practiced, has backfired spectacularly and done far more harm than good, as evidenced most clearly by the response to COVID-19.

We begin with the definitions and history of a few key terms: censorship, free speech, misinformation, disinformation, and bots.

Censorship and Free Speech

Censorship is any deliberate suppression or prohibition of speech, whether for good or ill. In the United States and countries which have adopted its model, censorship induced by governments and their appendages is constitutionally prohibited except in the narrow category of “illegal speech”—e.g., obscenity, child exploitation, speech abetting criminal conduct, and speech that incites imminent violence.

Because censorship involves the exercise of power to silence another individual, censorship is inherently hierarchical. A person who lacks the power to silence another cannot censor them. For this reason, censorship inherently reinforces existing power structures, whether rightly or wrongly.

Though the United States may be the first country to have enshrined the right to free speech in its constitution, the right to free speech developed over centuries and predates the Western Enlightenment. For example, the right to speak freely was inherent to the democratic practices of the political classes in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, even if it was not enshrined in words. This is only logical; because these systems treated all members of the political class as equals, no member of the political class had the power to censor another except with the consent of the body politic.

The right to free speech developed and receded in fits and starts over the coming centuries for a number of reasons; but in accordance with George Orwell’s view of institutional evolution, free speech developed primarily because it afforded an evolutionary advantage to the societies in which it was practiced. For example, the political equality among Medieval British lords in their early parliamentary system necessitated free speech among them; by the 19th century, the cumulative benefits of this evolutionary advantage would help make Britain the world’s primary superpower. The United States arguably went a step further by enshrining free speech in its constitution and extending it to all adults, affording the United States a still greater evolutionary advantage.

By contrast, because censorship depends on and reinforces existing power structures, censors tend especially to target those who seek to hold power to account. And, because the advancement of human civilization is essentially one unending struggle to hold power to account, this censorship is inherently incompatible with human progress. Civilizations that engage in widespread censorship therefore tend to stagnate.

Misinformation

Misinformation is any information that is not completely true, regardless of the intent behind it. A flawed scientific study is one form of misinformation. An imperfect recollection of past events is another.

Technically, under the broadest definition of “misinformation,” all human thoughts and statements other than absolute mathematical axioms and theorems soundly proven on their basis are misinformation, because all human thoughts and statements are generalizations based on subjective beliefs and experiences, none of which can be considered perfectly true. Moreover, no particular levels or “degrees” of misinformation can be readily defined; the relative truth or falsity of any information exists on a continuum with infinite degrees.

Accordingly, because virtually all human thoughts and statements can be defined as misinformation, a prerogative to identify and censor misinformation is extraordinarily broad, depending entirely on the breadth of the definition of “misinformation” employed by the censor in any given instance. Because no particular “degrees” of misinformation can be defined, an official with a license to censor misinformation could censor virtually any statement at any time and justify their action, correctly, as having censored misinformation. In practice, because no man is an angel, this discretion inherently comes down to the biases, beliefs, loyalties, and self-interests of the censor.

Disinformation

Disinformation is any information shared by a person who knows it to be false. Disinformation is synonymous with lying.

Disinformation goes back centuries and is far from limited to the Internet. For example, according to Virgil, toward the end of the Trojan War, the Greek warrior Sinon presented the Trojans with a wooden horse that the Greeks had supposedly left behind as they fled—without informing the hapless Trojans that the horse was, in fact, filled with the Greeks’ finest warriors. Sinon could rightly be considered one of history’s first accounts of a foreign disinformation agent.

In a more modern example of disinformation, Adolf Hitler convinced Western leaders to cede the Sudetenland by making the false promise, “We want no Czechs.” But just a few months later, Hitler took all of Czechoslovakia without a fight. As it turned out, Hitler did want Czechs, and much more besides.

Technically, disinformation can come just as easily from a source either foreign or domestic, though how such disinformation should be treated—from a legal perspective—is very dependent on whether the disinformation had a foreign or domestic source. Because the greatest challenge in distinguishing simple misinformation from deliberate disinformation is the intent of the speaker or writer, identifying disinformation presents all the same challenges that people have faced, since time immemorial, in identifying lies.

Is a statement more likely to be a lie, or disinformation, if someone has been paid or otherwise incentivized or coerced to say it? What if they’ve wrongly convinced themselves that the statement is true? Is it enough that they merely should have known the statement is untrue, even if they didn’t have actual knowledge? If so, how far should an ordinary person be expected to go to find out the truth for themselves?

Just like lying, disinformation is generally considered negative. But in certain circumstances, disinformation can be heroic. For example, during the Second World War, some German citizens hid their Jewish friends for years while telling Nazi officials that they did not know of their whereabouts. Because of circumstances like these, the right to lie, except when under oath or in furtherance of a crime, is inherent to the right to free speech—at least for domestic purposes.

Defining “foreign disinformation” further complicates the analysis. Is a statement “foreign disinformation” if a foreign entity invented the lie, but it was shared by a domestic citizen who was paid to repeat it, or who knew it was a lie? What if the lie was invented by a foreign entity, but the domestic citizen who shared it did not know it was a lie? All these factors must be considered in correctly defining foreign and domestic disinformation and separating it from mere misinformation.

Bots

The traditional definition of an online bot is a software application that posts automatically. However, in common usage, “bot” is more often used to describe any anonymous online identity who is secretly incentivized to post according to specific narratives on behalf of an outside interest, such as a regime or organization.

This modern definition of “bot” can be difficult to pin down. For example, platforms like Twitter permit users to have several accounts, and these accounts are allowed to be anonymous. Are all of these anonymous accounts bots? Is an anonymous user a “bot” solely by virtue of the fact that they’re beholden to a regime? What if they’re merely beholden to a corporation or small business? What level of independence separates a “bot” from an ordinary anonymous user? What if they have two accounts? Four accounts?

The most sophisticated regimes, such as China’s, have vast social media armies consisting of hundreds of thousands of employees who post to social media on a daily basis using VPNs, allowing them to conduct vast disinformation campaigns involving hundreds of thousands of posts in a very short timespan without ever resorting to automated bots in the traditional sense. Thus, Chinese disinformation campaigns are impossible to stop algorithmically, and even difficult to identify with absolute certainty. Perhaps for this reason, whistleblowers have reported that social media companies like Twitter have effectively given up on trying to police foreign bots—even while they pretend to have the issue under control for purposes of public relations.

Information Warfare in the Present Day

Owing to the seriousness with which they’ve studied the methods of information warfare, and perhaps to their long mastery of propaganda and linguistics for purposes of exercising domestic control, authoritarian regimes such as China’s appear to have mastered disinformation in the early 21st century to a degree with which Western national security officials can’t compete—similar to how the Nazis mastered the methods of 20th century disinformation before their democratic rivals.

The magnitude and effects of these foreign disinformation campaigns in the present day are difficult to measure. On the one hand, some argue that foreign disinformation is so ubiquitous as to be largely responsible for the unprecedented political polarization that we see in the present day. Others approach these claims with skepticism, arguing that the specter of “foreign disinformation” is being used primarily as a pretext to justify Western officials’ suppression of free speech in their own countries. Both arguments are valid, and both are true to varying degrees and in various instances.

The best evidence that national security officials’ alarm about foreign disinformation is justified is, ironically, an example so egregious that they have yet to acknowledge it happened, seemingly out of embarrassment and fear of the political fallout: the lockdowns of spring 2020. These lockdowns weren’t part of any democratic country’s pandemic plan and had no precedent in the modern Western world; they appear to have been instigated by officials with strange connections to China based solely on China’s false claim that their lockdown was effective in controlling COVID in Wuhan, assisted in no small part by a vast propaganda campaign across legacy and social media platforms. It’s therefore essentially axiomatic that the lockdowns of spring 2020 were a form of foreign disinformation. The catastrophic harms that resulted from these lockdowns prove just how high the stakes in 21st century information warfare can be.

That said, the astonishing failure of Western officials to acknowledge the catastrophe of lockdowns seems to speak to their unseriousness in actually winning the 21st century information war, justifying skeptics’ arguments that these officials are merely using foreign disinformation as a pretext to suppress free speech at home.

For example, after the catastrophic lockdowns of spring 2020, not only did national security officials never acknowledge foreign influence on lockdowns, but on the contrary we saw a small army of national security officials actually engaging in domestic censorship of well-credentialed citizens who were skeptical of the response to COVID—effectively exacerbating the effects of the lockdown disinformation campaign and, conspicuously, making their own countries even more like China.

The Orwellian pretext for this vast domestic censorship apparatus is that, because there is no way to properly identify or control foreign social media bots, foreign disinformation has become so ubiquitous within Western discourse that federal officials can only combat it by surreptitiously censoring citizens for what the officials deem to be “misinformation,” regardless of the citizens’ motivations. These officials have thus deemed well-qualified citizens who oppose the response to COVID-19 to be spreading “misinformation,” a term which can encompass virtually any human thought or statement. Depending on their underlying motivations and loyalties, the actions of these officials in surreptitiously censoring “misinformation” may have even been an intentional part of the lockdown disinformation campaign; if so, this speaks to the multi-level complexity and sophistication of information warfare in the 21st century.