CDC – Fertility Rates USA (2005-2021)

Exit full screenEnter Full screen
previous arrow
next arrow

Covid “vaccine” expert testimony: UK partliament (Dec 4, 2023)

See also:

Download File


Download File

Download File

Download File

Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars

This is the top secret manual said to be found by accident in 1986 by an employee of Boeing Aircraft. He bought a surplus IBM copier for scrap parts at a government sale and found the manual inside. The manual outlines a plan to control the masses through manipulation of industry, education and politics, and to divert the public’s attention from what is really going on. It is an interesting reading for those exploring the deeper levels of social structure and how it may be controlled or influenced.

Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars

The myth of data security, data protection & privacy

Wer einmal lügt, dem glaubt man nicht, und wenn er auch die Wahrheit spricht.
Whoever lies once is not believed, even if he speaks the truth.

In order to identify a teenager who is a climate-activist, Proton handed over data to the government (under “terrorist law”).

The article above, which claims that Proton passed on the IP address of the “activist”, was posted on Twitter by someone. (ProtonMail has explicitly stated in its privacy policy that it does not log IP addresses.)

Proton’s CEO responded to the tweet:

After the case was denied by Protons CEO someone posted the actual police report which clearly shows what was going on:

Then the CEO admitted:

Proton now changed its IP-log statement:

Wikipeadia states: (accessed 24.11.2023)

Due to the encryption utilized, Proton Mail is unable to hand over the contents of encrypted emails under any circumstances, but according to Proton’s privacy policy, Proton Mail can be legally compelled to log IP addresses as part of a Swiss criminal investigation.[64] For this reason, the company strongly suggests that users who need to hide their identity from the Swiss government use their Tor hidden service/onion site. I

Kobeissi, N.. (2018). An Analysis of the ProtonMail Cryptographic Architecture. Cryptology EPrint Archive
Saxena, K., Rajdev, D., Bhatia, D., & Bahl, M.. (2021). ProtonMail: Advance Encryption and Security. In Proceedings – International Conference on Communication, Information and Computing Technology, ICCICT 2021

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1109/ICCICT50803.2021.9510041
directSciHub download

Hur, U., Park, M., & Kim, J.. (2022). A reused key attack on an encrypted mobile app database: Case study on KakaoTalk and ProtonMail. Journal of Information Security and Applications

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.jisa.2022.103181
directSciHub download

See also:
Silva, Gioia da (August 4, 2021). “”If you say the word compulsory vaccination again, I’ll knock your and your wife’s teeth out”: The Swiss service Proton Mail is repeatedly misused for threats”. Neue Zürcher Zeitung. Retrieved September 10, 2021.

“Important clarifications regarding arrest of climate activist”. September 6, 2021. Retrieved September 10, 2021.

Christopher Simpson: Americas Recruitment of Nazis

Blowback is the first thorough, scholarly study of the US government’s extensive recruitment of Nazis and fascist collaborators right after the war. Although others have approached the topic since, Simpson’s book remains the essential starting point. The author demonstrates how this secret policy of collaboration only served to intensify the Cold War and has had lasting detrimental effects on the American government and society that endure to this day.

Social Identity Theory (SIT)

Social Identity Theory (SIT), developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, explores the cognitive processes behind how individuals define their identities within social groups. It’s a fundamental theory in social psychology that helps explain intergroup behaviors, prejudices, and discrimination.

Core Tenets:

1. Categorization: SIT suggests that people categorize themselves and others into social groups, creating an “us vs. them” mentality. This categorization forms a part of one’s self-concept and social identity.

2. Social Comparison: Individuals strive to maintain a positive self-concept by comparing their in-group favorably with out-groups. This comparison bolsters self-esteem and enhances social identity.

3. In-Group Favoritism: People show preference and favoritism towards their in-group, as it contributes to a positive social identity, bolstering their self-esteem.

Processes in SIT:

1. Social Identity: It refers to the part of an individual’s self-concept that derives from their membership in social groups. For instance, someone may strongly identify themselves as a part of a religious, ethnic, or national group.

2. Cognitive Aspect: SIT emphasizes the cognitive processes involved in perceiving and categorizing oneself and others into various social groups, which influences behaviors and attitudes.

3. Intergroup Behavior: The theory explains intergroup behaviors, such as in-group favoritism and discrimination against out-groups. These behaviors are driven by the need to maintain a positive social identity.

Further References

1. Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison . Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations, 61(76), 293.

2. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict . The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74.

3. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory . Basil Blackwell.

SIT is crucial in understanding group dynamics, intergroup conflicts, and the basis of prejudices. It provides insights into how social identities are formed, how they influence behaviors and attitudes, and the implications for intergroup relations.

The Minimal Group Paradigm

The Minimal Group Paradigm, introduced by social psychologist Henri Tajfel in the 1970s, explores the minimal conditions required for individuals to exhibit in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination, even in the absence of substantial reasons for group differentiation. This paradigm aims to understand the psychological mechanisms underlying intergroup biases.

Foundation of the Minimal Group Paradigm:

1. Minimal Categorization: Participants are divided into groups based on trivial distinctions, like preferences for certain artworks, random assignments, or color choices.

2. Task Allocation: Individuals are then engaged in various activities where they distribute rewards or resources between members of their own group (in-group) and members of the other group (out-group).

Key Findings and Observations:

1. In-Group Favoritism: Even in conditions where group assignment is completely arbitrary or inconsequential, participants consistently show a bias towards their in-group. They tend to allocate more resources or rewards to members of their own group.

2. Out-Group Discrimination: Simultaneously, individuals exhibit discrimination against the out-group by favoring their in-group in resource distribution, even if it results in fewer overall resources for the in-group.

Psychological Mechanisms:

1. Social Identity Theory: Tajfel’s theory posits that people categorize themselves into social groups to boost their self-esteem. This categorization leads to in-group favoritism as a way to enhance their social identity and self-worth.

2. Minimal Conditions for Bias: The findings from the Minimal Group Paradigm suggest that even minimal and arbitrary categorization can lead to in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination, highlighting the innate human tendency towards group biases.

Further References

1. Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination . Scientific American, 223(5), 96-102.

2. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict . The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74.

3. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1990). Social motivation, self-esteem, and social identity . In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances (pp. 28-47). Harvester Wheatsheaf.

The Minimal Group Paradigm provides essential insights into the psychological roots of intergroup biases, emphasizing how even the most minimal distinctions can trigger biases. Understanding these mechanisms is critical in addressing and mitigating intergroup conflicts and biases in various social settings.

Robbers Cave Experiment (classics in social psychology)

The Robbers Cave Experiment, conducted by social psychologist Muzafer Sherif and his team in 1954, was a landmark study investigating intergroup conflicts and group dynamics. It was carried out at Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma over three weeks and involved 22 11-year-old boys. The experiment is a classic illustration of intergroup conflict, cooperation, and resolution.

The Setup:

1. Stage 1: Formation of Groups: The boys were divided into two separate groups: the Eagles and the Rattlers. They were kept isolated from each other, unaware of the other group’s existence.

2. Group Cohesion Development: Over a week, each group formed strong bonds and developed their unique identities through team-based activities.

3. Intergroup Introduction: The two groups were introduced to each other in a competitive setting. This immediately led to hostility and conflict between the groups.

The Conflict Phase:

1. Competition and Hostility: The experimenters created situations where the groups competed against each other for resources. This competition intensified the hostility and led to the development of negative stereotypes about the opposing group.

2. Escalation of Conflict: As the competition continued, the boys exhibited increased hostility, with verbal insults and physical confrontations. The groups developed strong in-group loyalty and began to discriminate against the other group.

Resolution Phase:

1. Superordinate Goals: Sherif introduced tasks that required the cooperation of both groups to achieve common goals. For instance, a problem that could only be solved if both groups worked together.

2. Reduced Conflict: As the groups cooperated to achieve these shared goals, the hostility diminished. They began to see each other in a more positive light.

3. Fusion and Integration: The boys developed friendships across groups, and the hostility significantly decreased. The experiment demonstrated that working together towards common objectives reduced intergroup conflict.

Further References

Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1988). The Robbers Cave experiment: Intergroup conflict and cooperation . Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Sherif, M. (1966). In common predicament: Social psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation . Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

This experiment is crucial in understanding group behavior, conflict resolution, and the conditions that foster cooperation among conflicting groups. It sheds light on the importance of shared goals in reducing intergroup hostility and fostering harmony.

  • Muzafer Sherif, C. W. Sherif: Experimentelle Untersuchungen zum Verhalten in Gruppen. In: J.-J. Koch (Hrsg.): Sozialer Einfluss und Konformität. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim und Basel 1977, S. 167–192.
  • M. Sherif, C. W. Sherif: Social Psychology (Int. Rev. Ed.). Harper & Row, New York 1969.
  • M. Sherif, O. J. Harvey, B. J. White, W. R. Hood, C. W. Sherif: Intergroup conflict and cooperation: the Robbers Cave experiment. University of Oklahoma Book Exchange, Norman 1961.
  • M. Sherif, B. J. White, O. J. Harvey: Status in experimentally produced groups. In: American Journal of Sociology. Band 60, 1955, S. 370–379.
  • M. Sherif, C. W. Sherif: Groups in harmony and tension. Harper & Row, New York 1953.

See also:

National Security Study Memorandum: The Kissinger report (declassified)

See also:

The Population Council is a leading research organization dedicated to building an equitable and sustainable world that enhances the health and well-being of current and future generations. We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world.

See also:

UNFPA is the United Nations sexual and reproductive health agency. Our mission is to deliver a world where every pregnancy is wanted, every childbirth is safe and every young person’s potential is fulfilled.

More infos
A 2001 study conducted by the pro-life Population Research Institute claimed that the UNFPA shared an office with the Chinese family planning officials who were carrying out forced abortions. “We located the family planning offices, and in that family planning office, we located the UNFPA office, and we confirmed from family planning officials there that there is no distinction between what the UNFPA does and what the Chinese Family Planning Office does,” said Scott Weinberg, a spokesman for finalchinareport
the kissinger report