ROLAND ANGLE: NIST wrapped so many lies around each other regarding WTC Building 7 that it takes a professional to undo them all

[RG911Team] The government’s 9/11 lies are like a Russian doll.

As structural engineer Roland Angle explained in the documentary “Seven”, NIST wrapped so many lies around each other regarding WTC Building 7 that it takes a professional to undo them all. pic.twitter.com/1ipzuAyyaV

— Richard Gage, AIA, Architect (@RichardGage_911) September 19, 2024

DR. MERCOLA: According to researchers, over a third of all cellular magnesium is found in mitochondria, and various cellular processes rely on this mineral to function.

“According to researchers, over a third of all cellular magnesium is found in mitochondria, and various cellular processes rely on this mineral to function. When magnesium mitochondrial homeostasis is disrupted, ATP (adenosine triphosphate) production becomes compromised and…

— Wejolyn 🇺🇸 (@Wejolyn) September 18, 2024

PETER ST ONGE: Many more suits are coming, perhaps tens of thousands given there are roughly half a million federal regulations almost none of which were actually authorized by Congress.

The administrative state is unraveling as hundreds of unconstitutional rules are being challenged after the Loper Bright decision.

Rules range from SEC mandates and anti-farming rules to transgender mandates and citizenship for migrants.

The left, gloriously, is panicking. pic.twitter.com/4GFbFWyUTh

— Peter St Onge, Ph.D. (@profstonge) September 19, 2024

Some rare good news as left-wing mouthpiece, Politico, worries a recent Supreme Court decision will be "abused" to erase the "legacy of the Biden Harris nightmare."  The decision in question of course is June's Loper v. Bright case that gutted Chevron Deference, as it said that major regulations actually have to be passed by Congress, not by unelected Deep State bureaucrats.  This is because the Constitution very clearly states that Congress, who works for the people in theory, is supposed to make laws, not random bureaucrats who indisputably work for themselves.  

Source: Article I, Section I of the U.S. Constitution.

Loper Bright gutted a "cornerstone of progressive policymaking their ability to sneak laws in through the administrative state and running voters," which, fun fact, converts democracy into tyranny.  So what's upsetting Politico is that if Congress is supposed to make the rules, it turns out the vast majority of rules in existence at the moment were not made by Congress.  They just sort of spawned from the moist bowels of the deep state.  Politico is upset that "small government conservatives are suing to eliminate these apparently unconstitutional mandates." Worse for them, in a separate Supreme Court case Corner Post said that "there is no statute of limitations to challenging unconstitutional regulations," meaning they're all at risk even the old ones.  So which moist spawnings in particular are at risk?  Well, we're only two and a half months into Loper Bright and such things do move slowly, but we've already seen a Mississippi judge void transgender mandates; a Texas judge block an unconstitutional non-compete ban; and an Ohio appeals court block a rule regulating internet companies.  Another Texas judge struck down so-called "parole in place" that puts illegals on a path to citizenship.  They struck it down specifically because the rule "illegally bypassed Congress."  Others involve former mandates, small business mandates, manufacturing, abortion benefits, price controls, and, of course, the Biden-Harris student loan bailouts that would make blue collars pay for other people's gender degrees.  None of these were actually voted by Congress, meaning they are all gloriously unconstitutional.  In theory, Congress could turn around and actually pass the rules, replacing bureaucratic diktat with clean law.  In reality, almost no federal rules are actually popular; that's why Congress passes the buck in the first place.  So in all likelihood, the vast majority of mandates that are struck down will stay down.  Democrats know this and being the party of the administrative state they realize that even if cackles gets the White House they are losing the game.  The activist industrial complex is being dethroned. Some major suits have already been filed, one to dismantle a massive market surveillance system run by the SEC.  Other challenges a raft of "conservation measures on small farms that would drive them out of business."  Many more suits are coming, perhaps tens of thousands given there are roughly half a million federal regulations almost none of which were actually authorized by Congress.  As each mandate melts away, the economy gets stronger and the space for Liberty expands how you run your farm, how you run your business, earn a living, and how you educate your children.  It may not feel like it, but we are winning.  Thanks to the Constitution, things will get worse before they get better but we're turning the corner thanks to some very brave men 200 years ago and the greatest constitution in history that they left us.

SOLZHENITSYN: Should one point out that from ancient times declining courage has been considered the beginning of the end?

Owen Benjamin on societal collapse echoes Solzhenitsyn on the destruction of communism. 

Thread by @JeremyTate41 on Solzhenitsyn https://t.co/plfhYW5fbU

— Tom Luongo (Head Sneetch) (@TFL1728) September 18, 2024

Here is the complete version of the 20 quotes by Solzhenitsyn.  

1) Socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. 

2) Should one point out that from ancient times declining courage has been considered the beginning of the end? 

3) A decline in courage may be the most striking feature which an outside observer notices in the West in our days. 

4) Even biology knows that habitual, extreme safety and well-being are not advantageous for a living organism. Today, well-being in the life of Western society has begun to reveal its pernicious mask. 

5) The defense of individual rights has reached such extremes as to make society as a whole defenseless against certain individuals.

6) Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic disease of the 20th century and more than anywhere else this disease is reflected in the press. 

7) I have received letters in America from highly intelligent persons, maybe a teacher in a faraway small college who could do much for the renewal and salvation of his country, but his country cannot hear him because the media are not interested in him. 

8) But should someone ask me whether I would indicate the West such as it is today as a model to my country, frankly I would have to answer negatively. No, I could not recommend your society in its present state as an ideal for the transformation of ours. 

9) A fact which cannot be disputed is the weakening of human beings in the West while in the East they are becoming firmer and stronger. 

10) There are meaningful warnings which history gives a threatened or perishing society. Such are, for instance, the decadence of art, or a lack of great statesmen. 

11) Only moral criteria can help the West against communism's well planned world strategy. There are no other criteria. 

12) In spite of the abundance of information, or maybe because of it, the West has difficulties in understanding reality such as it is.

13) And yet -- no weapons, no matter how powerful, can help the West until it overcomes its loss of willpower. In a state of psychological weakness, weapons become a burden for the capitulating side.

14) In the American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual human rights were granted because man is God's creature. That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. 

15) All the glorified technological achievements of Progress, including the conquest of outer space, do not redeem the 20th century's moral poverty which no one could imagine even as late as in the 19th Century. 

16) Not by coincidence all of communism's meaningless pledges and oaths are about Man, with a capital M, and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today's West and today's East.  

17) Liberalism was inevitably displaced by radicalism; radicalism had to surrender to socialism; and socialism could never resist communism.

18) In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. But Western intellectuals still look at it with interest and with empathy. 

19) Even if we are spared destruction by war, our lives will have to change if we want to save life from self-destruction.

20) If the world has not come to its end, it has approached a major turn in history, equal in importance to the turn from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. 

Excellent interview of Graeme MacQueen by James Corbett covering Graeme’s book on the October 2001 anthrax attacks

Here’s a good interview of Graeme MacQueen by James Corbett covering Graeme’s book on the October 2001 anthrax attacks.  https://t.co/4LG0hjNlP5 pic.twitter.com/IJmf74DnE1

— Kevin Ryan (@KevinRyan911) September 18, 2024

Wow.  Ryan provides Graeme MacQueen's book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy, here at The International Center for 9/11 Justice. 

23:00. We often think of September 2001 as a crucial time.  I t was.  That's when the 9/11 attacks happened.  But October 2001 in a way is just as important.  That's when the bombing in Afghanistan begins.  That's when very overt preparation begins for attacking Iraq.  That's when the PATRIOT Act is passed.  That's when the NSA as we know now begins mass spying on US citizens. That's when the anthrax attacks happen.  So as you said earlier, it's not just a matter of September, these events were drawn out over the fall.  That's the leading hypothesis up until the PATRIOT Act that was signed into law on the 26th of October. And George Bush when he gives his little speech justifying the PATRIOT Act on that day, he refers to 9/11 and he refers to the anthrax attack and his speech assumes that they were done by the same group or at least related group with extremists.  But rapidly after the Patriot Act is passed the narrative begins to crumble and one of the reasons it begins to crumble is because of hard science on those who look at the spores it seems clear that some of the people who examined the anthrax spores had not been fully brought into this fraud.  They're saying, you know, I'm sorry but this looks like an American product.  This looks like it comes from our own domestic programs, not just American but from US military and intelligence, and that really quite rapidly becomes accepted for very specific reasons.  By the end of the year, by the end of December 2001, all the frauds meant to frame Al-Qaeda and Iraq have crumbled.  There is a group that continues to kind of revive those theories from time to time over the next year but the main consensus, and that includes the FBI, it includes Homeland Security, it includes the White House, is that somehow this has come from within our own biological weapons program, and at that point the FBI goes into damage control mode and tries to create these narratives of a lone nut somehow and eccentric, dangerous, possibly mentally unbalanced individual in our system had done these attacks.  And if that's true, of course, it tells us really nothing. 

27:35  Apparently there was a 2005 civil case filed by the family of Robert Stevens, 62, died on October 5, 2001, the first victim of the anthrax attacks, and that case actually provoked the Department of Justice to issue a summary for a motion of judgment, wanting to dismiss the case.  

[A summary judgment is when a civil court rules in favor of one party over the other without a full trial.  When a party files for a summary judgment, they are then referred to as the "Moving Party."  Two requirements: first, the parties to the lawsuit have to agree to the material facts, the facts that are important to the legal decision.  Second, the law must say these undisputed facts entitle the "Moving Party" to a judgment.  The evidence must be admissible.  The judge can only look at what is allowed by the evidence code.  Your testimony and that of a key witness are down on paper.  The witness has to sign the evidence on paper in front of a notary, called an affidavit.  Both you and your opponent can bring affidavits.  Written arguments are called Memorandum.]