12bytes Mumble meet every Sat. night!
Coronavirus information & resources
Vaccines - What You Need To Know

What does a better world look like?

If you were tasked with re-imagining all of our systems in order to create a new way of living, what would your vision look like? Would there be governments? Would there be laws? Would there be money?

I've asked this question to several people and, as i recall, i was disappointed at their responses in every case because in every case they failed to think outside the box. Rather then imagining new systems, they always fell back to using our current systems as a template. Of course you have a monetary system! How else are you going to trade and buy stuff, and what incentive would people have to work absent money, they might say. And without government and laws you have anarchy, they posit. That last statement is kind of funny because, according to the definition of anarchy i'm familiar with, anarchy is a well functioning society absent government, a concept they generally find to be impossible, but is it? Unfortunately anarchy has taken on strong negative connotations over the years by authoritarian governments and their handlers who insist on total control over everything and, more recently, as a result of radical Marxists/communists like Antifa and Black Lives Matter who pretend to be precisely the opposite of what they are.

Already the reader may be sensing underlying tones of socialist or communist ideologies in one possible solution to our problems i shall shed light upon, however that isn't what is being suggested, not at all.

Anyone who has done any serious research regarding how and why the world works as it does will be intimately familiar with the phrase "new world order" and much of what that entails as laid out by its psychopathic planners. Such plans have since been rebranded under titles such as "The Great Reset" and "Build Back Better" following the engineered COVID-19 "pandemic", made possible in part by misusing polymerase chain reaction (rtRCR testing) and all of the puppet mainstream media, including all of the mainstream social media platforms. The truth of the matter however is that we do need a new world order, just not one which is dictated by self-serving, psychopathic, tyrants and trans-humanists who only pretend to care about the welfare of the earth and the human species.

If you ask anyone what they think the root of our problems are, they might answer that money or greed is the culprit and they would be incorrect. I see the root cause of the great majority of our problems, and probably all of our major problems, as being a lack of a proper education. Most of our systems, including government, education, science and healthcare, revolve around money and the curriculum in our schools is designed to support these systems. Schools don't produce free thinkers because a free thinker would be damaging to "the system".

While i admire any activist or journalist that fights for a cause i feel is just, especially those who risk their well-being, most of these people and organizations are fighting the wrong enemy in my opinion. They are attempting to upright capsized systems without ever questioning whether the existence of the system itself is necessary. For example they think the answer to a corrupt government is to cut out the corruption and while this may be a short term solution to a few problems, it is just that; a short term solution which guarantees a return to a state of corruption. This axiom has been cemented in U.S. history by Thomas Jefferson who apparently stated (i never sourced the quote myself) that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.". Can we not do better than repeating the same cycle of corruption and cleansing over and over? Is this not the definition of insanity? I, along with many others far more intelligent and educated than i am, think we can.

Many people would insist that greed is an inherent trait of our species, however there is evidence to suggest it is largely, if not entirely, a learned behavior. In an interview with High Times Buckminster Fuller stated:

Ignorance and greed are part of the evolutionary process, which is just to say that mistakes are part of learning. There is nothing bad about behaviors or perceptions that do not work; they simply have to be given up and replaced by behaviors or perceptions that do work.

Jacque Fresco, founder of The Venus Project, writes:

Human behavior is subject to the same laws as any other natural phenomenon. Our customs, behaviors, and values are byproducts of our culture. No one is born with greed, prejudice, bigotry, patriotism and hatred; these are all learned behavior patterns.

Fresco was an amazing man; a true out-of-the-box thinker who spent most of his life analyzing the problems of our current societies and systems and proposing logical solutions to them. He was an inventor and a futurist who was able to discard the perceived "necessities" of our current systems, including socialism, communism and capitalism, and create something entirely new.

With the exception of the "global warming" due to human produced CO2 bullshit, the following is a very worthwhile documentary. The other issue i have with the film is the proposal for power generation using technologies based on solar, wind and water. There are infinitely better, cheaper, more stable and environmentally friendly ways to produce energy either centrally or at the individual home level. For more information i might suggest reading A Practical Guide to Free Energy Devices (alternate link).

The Choice is Ours (2016) (alternate link)

This documentary explores the determinants of behavior to dispel the myth of “human nature”, demonstrating that environment shapes behavior. It illustrates how our social structures impose our values and behaviors demonstrating that our global monetary system is obsolete and increasingly insufficient to meet the needs of most people. It concludes with the vision of The Venus Project to build an entirely new world from the ground up, a “redesign of the culture” where all enjoy a high standard of living, free of servitude and debt, while also protecting the environment.

Peter Joseph, creator of the powerful Zeitgeist series of documentary videos, is on a path that is not so dissimilar from that of The Venus Project. Peter's work resulted in the international Zeitgeist Movement. The following is from their mission statement:

The focus includes recognizing that the majority of the modern world’s social problems, including mounting ecological crises and destabilizing economic inequality (oppression, poverty, conflict, corruption, etc.) is not an inevitable outcome of our civilization. Rather, TZM sees these issues as consequential symptoms of an outdated social system.

There are many resources available for those that recognize the problems with our current systems, including the following:

The subversive origins of the internet

The subversive origins of the internet – 12Bytes.org

The world is run by self-serving psychopathic tyrants (the dwindling number of those who remain ignorant of this fact can begin their education at the Corbett Report).

Such men have no interest whatsoever in the betterment of mankind or the welfare of the Earth, and so i have often wondered why they would allow the mass proliferation of a tool, the internet, that could be used against them. Were they incapable of predicting the result when the people of the world were given access to their plans and an opportunity to unite in protest? Were they really that stupid?

The answer is, of course they were able to predict the outcome. The internet is doing exactly what it was designed to do.


The 'Moon hoax' cult - 5+ decades and still going

The catalyst for this article was discussions i had with two intelligent people who argue that man never set foot on the Moon. One has serious doubts and the other rejects the idea completely and it is the latter which has an extensive background in aerospace.

These recent discussions were certainly not my introduction into such claims however as i looked into this many moons ago (pun intended). There are many people who disbelieve that man walked on the Moon, some very smart and some just plain stupid, and the number seems to be growing. Smart people are just as easily fooled as is the dummy however.

If you've read some of the content on this website, especially in the history section, you'll know my beliefs are not main stream. I'm not sure they ever were. I enjoy finding fault with a given narrative and following the trail of breadcrumbs to a sound, or at least a logical conclusion. If you accused me of being a conspiracy theorist, i stand unapologetically guilty, however i'm also a conspiracy 'factist', if you will. I'm interested in truth, not confirming my own biases. Truth is not always easily discovered, however in this case there is a lot of evidence readily available and, in the end, that which is presented by the debunkers fails miserably when measured against the official claim.

My questioning of mainstream narratives began at an early age and when i delved into the validity of the Apollo Moon landings, i would not have been surprised in the least had the evidence led me to conclude that the whole thing was a big fat hoax as many believe. Matter of fact, i would have preferred such a result because it would have been yet another well deserved nail in the coffin of mainstream government bullshit.

I cannot prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that man set foot on the Moon. I wasn't there and i don't have physical access to the evidence. I've also learned to be critical of any claims i can't vet for myself, however there is indeed a wealth of evidence that strongly suggests we did, in fact, walk on the Moon and i'll lay out a tiny fraction of that evidence here. Yes, images, communications, telemetry and other evidence can be forged, however this overlooks the massive heap of evidence to the contrary as well as simple logic and reasoning. Simply put, the evidence which i've considered that the debunkers bring to the table ranges from completely retarded to inconclusive and much of it resides on the retarded end of the scale.

CLAIM: The entire Apollo 11 Moon landing was filmed using a miniature section model of the Moon hung upside down on a ceiling.
ANSWER: I don't know about this particular debunker, but personally i haven't yet been able to a) miniaturize myself to fit the scale of a model, b), managed to walk on my ceiling, or c), managed to kick up dust and drop things and have them fall up. Lastly, the morons who assembled the American Moon "documentary" in question rely on discussions about potential pitfalls that arose very early during the planning stages of the space program when a great deal of questions had no concrete answers, as though nothing further could be learned and nothing could possibly be changed during subsequent research and development.

CLAIM: Wikileaks released video showing the moon landing was shot in a studio.
ANSWER: Wikileaks never published any such information. The video is a compilation which includes behind the scenes footage from the filming of Capricorn 1 (1970) and actual footage of the Apollo 11 Moon landing. Even the "fact checking" website Snopes, founded by a criminal and staffed by prostitutes, actually gets this one right.

Alleged Wikileaks moon hoax video
Alleged Wikileaks moon hoax video
Capricorn 1 film set
Capricorn 1 film set

Links to the full videos:

CLAIM: The Apollo missions never left Earth orbit.
ANSWER: If that was the case then there should be evidence of sightings of the Command Module as it orbited Earth in the night sky due to light from the Sun reflecting off of it as is the case with satellites.

CLAIM: There can be no combustion in a vacuum.
ANSWER: Fuels that contain or produce oxygen as they burn will burn in an oxygen deprived environment.

CLAIM: There is nothing in a vacuum for a rocket engine to push against.
ANSWER: Every reaction creates and equal and opposite reaction, even in a vacuum.

CLAIM: The intense radiation level of Earths Van Allen Belts were not survivable by a human given the minimal protection offered by the craft.
ANSWER: While "minimal" is an exaggeration, the claim is not entirely without merit. That aside, the level of radiation doesn't matter if you pass through the belts quickly enough. From Apollo Rocketed Through the Van Allen Belts | Popular Science:

By February of 1964, NASA was confident that Apollo crews would be passing through the belts fast enough that the spacecraft’s skin and all the instrumentation lining the walls would be enough protection.


To monitor radiation exposure during the flights, Apollo crews carried dosimeters on board their spacecraft and on their persons. And these readings confirmed NASA had made a good choice. At the end of the program, the agency determined that its astronauts had avoided the large radiation doses many feared would ground flights to the Moon. Over the course of the lunar missions, astronauts were exposed to doses lower than the yearly 5 rem average experienced by workers with the Atomic Energy Commission who regularly deal with radioactive materials.

CLAIM: There's no blast crater or radial dispersion of material under the Lunar Excursion Module which would have resulted from its engine.
ANSWER: The Moon is a rock; gravity is 1/6th that of Earth so not as much thrust is required to land as would be necessary on Earth; in some instances the engine was apparently shut down just prior to the Lunar Module contacting the surface in order to avoid debris from damaging it; dispersion of the dust can be seen in some photographs captured from the Command Module, the Japanese Space Agency Selene probe, the Indian Chandrayaan-1 probe, all of which would have to be co-conspirators.

CLAIM: The Lunar Module was too fragile to withstand space travel.
ANSWER: This claim often seems to hinge on a "thin foil" being the only barrier to space in parts of the Lunar Module which is a gross exaggeration. This argument is then used to insinuate that the entire 36,000 lb. machine was fragile.

CLAIM: Lack of a radial disbursement of material under the Lunar Modules engine nozzle cannot be explained by shutting down the engine on the Lunar Module before touchdown since this would have risked damaging the fragile vehicle.
ANSWER: The Lunar Module had some serious shock absorption capability with the primary struts having 32 in. of compression travel; the Lunar Module weighed approximately 36,000 lbs. on Earth, but far less on the Moon; considering its Earth weight alone, much less the added load and tremendous vibration it needed to withstand during the Apollo launch, the Lunar Module was obviously not the flimsy contraption the debunkers would have us believe.

CLAIM: Stanly Kubrick confessed to filming the Apollo 11 Moon sequence.
ANSWER: "In a statement released through a spokesperson, the [Kubrick] family made it clear the film published on YouTube was a complete hoax, using an actor who was purporting to be the Clockwork Orange film director." (source)

CLAIM: The U.S. flag is blowing in the wind on the "Moon".
ANSWER: Momentum happens in a vacuum too when the pole to which the flag is attached is adjusted. And if the Apollo 11 mission was filmed in a studio, well, there's no wind there either. Lastly, this assumes those perpetrating the hoax were too stupid to recognize such a blatantly obvious oversight.

CLAIM: There's a photo of a Coke can on the Moon.
ANSWER: See the last part of the answer above. There was plenty of other equipment left on the Moon however as is evidenced in photographs captured by probes sent by several countries, as well as those captured by the Apollo Command Module, all of which the debunkers avoid. Such equipment includes 70+ vehicles, vehicle tracks, sensors, transmitters, seismometers, reflectors, Lunar Modules, payload transport pallets, solar panels, cameras, foot prints, and the Apollo 11 service module which may still be orbiting the Moon, all of which would have to be forgeries by several countries, all of which would have had to be co-conspirators. Lastly, forging this much evidence is utterly unnecessary as it only increases the risk that the hoax would be exposed.

CLAIM: Converging shadows prove that the light source was much closer to the areas being photographed than the Sun would have been, therefore the Moon photography was performed in a studio.
ANSWER: Easily debunked using a light bulb and 2 fingers to create shadows on a table. Shadows can indeed converge, especially when they are produced by irregularly shaped objects resting on an irregular surface, and this is not dependent on the distance of the light source. There is also the matter of perspective.

CLAIM: There are no stars in the photographs allegedly taken from the Moon.
ANSWER: There's no stars because the camera exposure was set to account for the bright, highly reflective surface of the Moon. Ever notice how many fewer stars you can see with the naked eye during a full Moon? Now imagine the light from the Sun as seen on the Moon with no atmosphere in between.

CLAIM: There are no stars in photographs taken from the Moon because it would have been impossible to create an accurate representation of the visible universe.
ANSWER: They couldn't have used enlarged photographs of the universe as a backdrop? Or plotted stars on a backdrop from photographs? Also see the above answer.

CLAIM: The astronauts said they didn't see any stars.
ANSWER: While some of the Apollo astronauts did in fact state they didn't recall seeing any stars from specific perspectives, some also stated that they could see stars when standing in the shadow of the Lunar Module, when orbiting the back side of the Moon, or when looking through optical devices. Also the astronauts had darkened visors to protect their eyes during the Moon walks. Also see the above answers.

CLAIM: The astronauts are too well lit in photographs when they were in shade.
ANSWER: The Moon is highly reflective; lightening of darker areas can be accomplished in the darkroom (known as "dodging").

CLAIM: Photographs taken by astronauts on the Moon are too well composed considering there was no viewfinder on their cameras.
ANSWER: Have you seen all of them? Did cropping photographs suddenly become impossible post Moon landing? Did they not practice beforehand? Is it necessary to forge 8,000+ photographs in order to perpetrate a hoax?

CLAIM: The camera crosshairs in photographs on the "Moon" are behind certain objects.
ANSWER: While that indeed appears to be the case in some of the photographs, it isn't. The crosshairs were on a glass plate in the camera so they could not possibly be behind anything in front of the camera, and if it is posited that the Hasselblad cameras never existed, then a sheet of glass or a filter with the crosshairs on it could be placed in front of the camera lens, or they could be added when printing the photographs. In either case the crosshairs can never be behind anything. The reason the crosshairs appear to be behind certain objects in some of the photographs is because they are washed out when they intersect a bright object, such as a space suit, and, in fact, the crosshairs can be seen in some of the photographs used by the debunkers.

CLAIM: Given the technical challenges it is extremely unlikely that 6 out of 7 Apollo missions could have met with success.
ANSWER: This ignores all that happened prior to Apollo 11. The space program had many failures, including the loss of at least 3 astronauts. So did the automobile industry. Do we not learn from our mistakes? NASA had to be as certain as possible that, as Kennedy stated, we could land a man on the Moon and return him safely to Earth. The space program was a massive effort that, contrary to what some of the debunkers imply, wasn't thrown together over night by a bunch of idiots. All of the debunking videos i've seen feature clip after clip of NASA failures early in the space program while omitting mention of many of the successes. The aircraft industry had many more failures, yet planes are flying today because lessons were learned and changes were made. Furthermore, why fake 6 landings? Why not quit after 1 or 2? Again, the more fakery, the higher the chance of being exposed.

CLAIM: Some of the Apollo 11 astronauts acted strange upon return, as though they had been threatened to not disclose the hoax.
ANSWER: This is another very thin claim, however assuming the astronauts actually did act strange upon return, i think this could possibly be due to having seen things they didn't expect, possibly on the way to the Moon or on their orbit around the dark side of the planet (there is some evidence of artificial structures on the dark side which is never seen from Earth). Another possible answer is their general state of fatigue after having endured such an intense and dangerous mission.

CLAIM: Given the complexity and technological limitations of the time, it would have been impossible for the Service Module to re-dock with the Command Module after leaving the Moon.
ANSWER: This is the only potentially reasonable argument against the Apollo Moon landings that i've heard and, quite interestingly, this argument was made by a friend who spent decades in the aerospace industry, much of that working with missile systems apparently. The basis of the argument is that the docking, given the equipment and technology available at that time, including very limited computing power, would have made it impossible to perform such an incredibly complex, delicate and precise maneuver. I think this argument overlooks the human-in-the-loop factor however. While re-docking was certainly a highly complex operation, which is why it was practiced successfully during the Gemini program, i suspect the automated portion of it (computer controlled burn times, vectoring, etc.) would only have to place the Service Module in the proximity of the Command Module on approximately the same course and velocity after which the pilot could take control and do what the computers may have been incapable of.

While i am not entirely convinced that 6 out of the 7 Apollo moon landing missions succeeded, i believe it is highly likely that they did and certainly the evidence suggests this. It is also quite obvious that the debunkers often omit analyzing the many pieces of convincing evidence which contradict their claims, such as that provided by other countries and organizations besides NASA which orbited the moon and photographed some of the equipment left there during the Apollo program.

Lastly, see the MOON HOAX: DEBUNKED! website.

The subversive origins of the internet

The world is run by self-serving psychopathic tyrants (the dwindling number of those who remain ignorant of this fact can begin their education at the Corbett Report).

Such men have no interest whatsoever in the betterment of mankind or the welfare of the Earth, and so i have often wondered why they would allow the mass proliferation of a tool, the internet, that could be used against them. Were they incapable of predicting the result when the people of the world were given access to their plans and an opportunity to unite in protest? Were they really that stupid?

The answer is, of course they were able to predict the outcome. The internet is doing exactly what it was designed to do.

How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet, Part 1

As the digital revolution was underway in the mid-nineties, research departments at the CIA and NSA were developing programs to predict the usefulness of the world wide web as a tool for capturing what they dubbed “birds of a feather” formations. That's when flocks of sparrows make sudden movements together in rhythmical patterns.

They were particularly interested in how these principles would influence the way that people would eventually move together on the burgeoning internet: Would groups and communities move together in the same way as ‘birds of a feather, so that they could be tracked in an organised way? And if their movements could be indexed and recorded, could they be identified later by their digital fingerprints?

To answer these questions, the CIA and NSA established a series of initiatives called Massive Digital Data Systems (MDDS) to directly fund tech entrepreneurs through an inter-university disbursement program. Naming their first unclassified briefing for computer scientists ‘birds of a feather,’ which took place in San Jose in the spring of 1995.

Amongst the first grants provided by the MDDS program to capture the ‘birds of a feather’ theory towards building a massive digital library and indexing system - using the internet as its backbone - were dispersed to two Stanford University PHD’s, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who were making significant headways in the development of web-page ranking technology that would track user movements online.


How the West Was Won: Counterinsurgency, PSYOPS and the Military Origins of the Internet, Part 2

As David Galula, a French commander who was an expert in counterinsurgency warfare during the Algerian War, emphasised:

“In any situation, whatever the cause, there will be an active minority for the cause, a neutral majority, and an active minority against the cause. The technique of power consists in relying on the favourable minority in order to rally the neutral majority and to neutralise or eliminate the hostile minority.”

Overtime, however, the intelligence state lost touch with reality, as the focus of its counterinsurgency programs shifted from foreign to domestic populations, from national security risks to ordinary citizens. Particularly in the wake of 9/11, when the NSA and its British counterpart, GCHQ, began mapping out the Internet.

Thanks to Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013, we now know that the NSA were collecting 200 billion pieces of data every month, including the cell phone records, emails, web searches and live chats of more than 200 million ordinary Americans. This was extracted from the world's largest internet companies via a lesser-known, data mining program called Prism.

There’s another name for this, and its total information awareness. The highest attainment of a paranoid state seeking absolute control over its population.


Dustin Broadbery on the subversive origins of the internet

Dustin Broadbery is an investigative journalist and blogger.

He previously chatted to me about the anatomy of a cult. This time, he chatted to me about the subversive origins of the internet, including the central and military intelligence links to Facebook, Siri, and a whole lot more.

It’s all a bit creepy and can make one somewhat paranoid about the promises of online privacy.


CIA Partners With Google, Amazon And IBM - PopularResistance.Org

The military industrial complex is returning to its roots as the CIA turns to big tech to maintain control and rebuild the war economy.

The vaunted “17 intelligence agencies” that comprise the U.S. intel community will be sharing a network of private-sector cloud computing service providers which includes Microsoft, Google, Oracle, IBM, and Amazon Web Services (AWS) as part of a 15-year contract said to be worth tens of billions of dollars.


Exclusive: Emails reveal close Google relationship with NSA | Al Jazeera America

Email exchanges between National Security Agency Director Gen. Keith Alexander and Google executives Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt suggest a far cozier working relationship between some tech firms and the U.S. government than was implied by Silicon Valley brass after last year’s revelations about NSA spying.

Disclosures by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden about the agency’s vast capability for spying on Americans’ electronic communications prompted a number of tech executives whose firms cooperated with the government to insist they had done so only when compelled by a court of law.

But Al Jazeera has obtained two sets of email communications dating from a year before Snowden became a household name that suggest not all cooperation was under pressure.


Lt. Col. Thomas Bearden tells the real story of Nikola Tesla

Tom Bearden, who unfortunately died in 2022, invented an over-unity energy device he called the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator (MEG). Tom was a remarkable, intelligent man who studied the works of one of the most underrated, misunderstood inventors of all time, Nikola Tesla. Tesla, who held over 700 patents, gave us much of the technology we have today, including AC electricity and wireless communication. He died a poor, lonely man in a crappy hotel room in New York City, after which his papers were stolen by government agencies.

Understanding people like Bearden and Tesla offers a crucial key to understanding how our potential as human beings has been robbed from us by greedy psychopaths, such as J. P. Morgan, who care only about money, power and control.

An archived version of Bearden's website: The Tom Bearden Website

The TRUE Story of Nikola Tesla - by Lt. Col. Thomas Bearden - Free Energy Device Explained

Youtube continue to delete videos from Dutch Sinse's channel so I am archiving this one here. This awesome interview loaded with mind-blowing information crushes the shills who claim that zero point energy is fake. This Lt. Col. "I basically just explained to you how to make a free energy device".

More here: https://www.youtube.com/c/DutchsinseOriginal/videos