Newsletter, 6/18/25
War Update, Biomedical, 4IR
[Tehran in flames. Image via Planet Waves Substack. ]
War Update. Eric Francis Coppolino posted this yesterday while i was putting together the Special Edition, “Waiting on the war” If i had done it a bit later, i would have included is. So here is his latest on the war. During the audio, he does well, identifying this war as the latest stage in implementing what’s called 4IR, Great Reset, Agenda 2030, UN SDGs,…, We are all to be herded into the Blockchain-based AI-managed crypto-financed global digital prison. This project started in earnest with 9/11 and was greatly accelerated with the 2020 “COVID” PsyOp. It’s been getting boosted by border enforcement, social programs and ID verification efforts. This war will take it PRIME TIME on all channels.
A look at the chart...Uranus is void of course...Moon and Sun are contacting deep space points, describing the scale of the situation...and the A.I fog makes it seem like this is just more bullshit. Eric Francis Coppolino, 6/17/25.
[Audi, 33 minutes, Trump’s Truth Social posting demanding “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER,” my interview of me, and this news item…]
Brad Lander, the New York City comptroller who is running for mayor, was arrested on Tuesday by federal agents at an immigration courthouse in Lower Manhattan as he tried to escort a migrant whom agents were seeking to arrest.
Mr. Lander, a Democrat, was observing proceedings at the city’s main immigration courthouse, at 26 Federal Plaza, where an increasing number of migrants who appear for court have been arrested in recent weeks by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. A spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security later said that Mr. Lander had assaulted and impeded a law enforcement officer, though federal prosecutors did not immediately bring charges on Tuesday.
Videos taken by reporters at the courthouse show Mr. Lander standing by a migrant man in a hallway on the 12th floor when several men in plainclothes who appear to be law enforcement officers, some wearing masks, push past a crowd in the hallway to arrest the migrant.
My comment at the page
Jeffrey Strahl, Lockdown Times, 6/17/25
"Unconditional surrender" is his demand, not only from the Iranian government but from the American people, even public officials.
"We now have complete and total control of the air over Iran," said Trump on Truth Social. "We aren't involved" of last Friday has evolved to :"we are winning.: More likely, it was the stance all along, evolving only in terms of how much this position was being revealed to the public.
Trump today, speaking on the White House lawn, was vague about any plans, saying no one knows what’s gonna happen. I gather he doesn’t either Meanwhile, Israeli air attacks continue to pound Iran and its people.
And, a bunch of people associated with a Washington DC entity called the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft have been appearing on media such as Al Jazeera and the Guardian, presenting voices critical of US policies in this matter. I did some investigative journalism and looked into its background. Quite interesting, who is being presented as the dissenting perspective.
From Wikipedia.
The Quincy Institute was co-founded by Andrew Bacevich, a former US Army officer who fought in the Vietnam War and later became a professor of history at Boston University.[2] Bacevich is the Emeritus Board Chair at the Quincy Institute and Stephen B. Heintz is the current Board Chair.[3]
[Basevich has been a frequent guest on Democracy Now and other Pacifica Network programs such as Flashpoints and has appeared ib other media such as The Nation]
Initial funding for the group, launched in November 2019,[4] included half a million dollars each from George Soros' Open Society Foundations and Charles Koch's Koch Foundation.[5][6][7] Substantial funding has also come from the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Schumann Center for Media and Democracy.[8] The institute distinguishes itself from many other think tanks in Washington, D.C. by refusing to accept money from foreign governments.[9]
[Right, like its admitted sources are OK]
The think tank is named after US President John Quincy Adams who, as secretary of state, said in a speech on July 4, 1821, that the US "goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy."[9] It has been described as "realist" and "promot[ing] an approach to the world based on diplomacy and restraint rather than threats, sanctions, and bombing."[10][11] David Klion wrote: "Quincy's founding members say again and again that 9/11 and the Iraq War were turning points in their careers."[9]
Purpose
The Quincy Institute states that it is a nonprofit research organization and think tank that hosts scholars, participates in debates, publishes analysis pieces by journalists and academics, and advocates for a "less militarized and more cooperative foreign policy".[12] According to its statement of purpose, it is opposed to the military-industrial complex described by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address.[12]
Co-founder Trita Parsi has described the Quincy Institute as "transpartisan", and, according to The Nation, has described the need for "an alliance of politicians on the left and right who agree on the need for restraint, even if they do so for different reasons".[9][13] According to Bacevich, the purpose of the institute is to "promote restraint as a central principle of US foreign policy — fewer wars and more effective diplomatic engagement."[14]
According to The Nation, the Quincy Institute founders believe that the existing foreign policy elite is out of step with the American public, which is "far more skeptical of military adventurism".[9] Mother Jones said that the Quincy Institute offers "a rare voice of dissent from foreign policy orthodoxy."[15] Daniel W. Drezner, writing in The Washington Post, described the institute as a "think tank that advocates a sober version of restraint", and said that it joined the Cato Institute, the Center for the National Interest, and New America "in the heterodox foreign policy basket".[11] [Cato is a Libertarian think-tank]
Hal Brands, writing in Bloomberg News, described it as a "well-funded think tank" that is part of the "restraint coalition", a "loose network of analysts, advocates and politicians calling for a sharply reduced US role in the world".[16] Jay Solomon, writing in The Free Press. described it as "neo-isolationist".[17] In 2024, the Quincy Institute was one of several organizations that opposed the reauthorization of the United States House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party.[18]
So, per a hunch i decided to search for any connections between Quincy and the “Multipolar World Order” narrative. Well, well, well,...
Is America Ready for a Multipolar World? November 14, 2022
QI Previews the G20 “Is America Ready for a Multipolar World?” Monday, November 14 from 9AM – 11AM (EST)
The United States’ position as the world’s sole superpower appears to be slipping. Chinese power and reach continues to grow. Much of the Global South has adopted an independent position on the response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as well as on America’s effort to contain China’s growth and influence. As world leaders gather at the G20 summit in Bali, America’s power and purpose is at a crossroads. Challengers of U.S. power – such as Russia’s Putin – welcome a new world order. Does that mean, however, that America should seek to restore American primacy through military dominance? Is this even possible? Or is America better off shifting strategy toward managing a world of shared leadership?
America Is Too Scared of the Multipolar World, Stephen Walt, March 7, 2023.
After the United States moved from the darkness of the Cold War into the pleasant glow of the so-called unipolar moment, a diverse array of scholars, pundits, and world leaders began predicting, yearning for, or actively seeking a return to a multipolar world. Not surprisingly, Russian and Chinese leaders have long expressed a desire for a more multipolar order, as have the leaders of emerging powers such as India or Brazil. More interestingly, so have important U.S. allies. Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder warned of the “undeniable danger” of U.S. unilateralism, and former French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine once declared that “the entire foreign policy of France … is aimed at making the world of tomorrow composed of several poles, not just one.” Current French President Emmanuel Macron’s support for European unity and strategic autonomy reveals a similar impulse.
[And in 2025, we see this “autonomy” functioning as an adjunct of US global power]
Surprise, surprise: U.S. leaders don’t agree. They prefer the expansive opportunities and gratifying status that come from being the indispensable power, [As if it’s all a matter of psychology rather than global capitalist dynamics] and they have been loath to abandon a position of unchallenged primacy. Back in 1991, the George H.W. Bush administration prepared a defense guidance document calling for active efforts to prevent the emergence of peer competitors anywhere in the world. The various National Security Strategy documents issued by Republicans and Democrats in subsequent years have all extolled the need to maintain U.S. primacy, even when they acknowledge the return of great power competition. Prominent academics have weighed in too—some arguing that U.S. primacy is “essential to the future of freedom,” and good for the United States and the world alike. I’ve contributed to this view myself, writing in 2005 that “the central aim of U.S. grand strategy should be to preserve its position of primacy for as long as possible.” (My advice on how to achieve that goal was ignored, however.)
Although the Biden administration recognizes that we are back in a world of several great powers, it seems nostalgic for the brief era when the United States didn’t face peer competitors. Hence its vigorous reassertion of “U.S. leadership,” its desire to inflict a military defeat on Russia that will leave it too weak to cause trouble in the future, and its efforts to stifle China’s rise by restricting Beijing’s access to critical technological inputs while subsidizing the U.S. semiconductor industry.
Even if these efforts succeed (and there’s no guarantee they will), restoring unipolarity is probably impossible. We are going to end up in 1) a bipolar world (with the United States and China as the two poles) or 2) a lopsided version of multipolarity where the United States is first among a set of unequal but still significant major powers (China, Russia, India, possibly Brazil, and conceivably a rearmed Japan and Germany).
Read the full piece in Foreign Policy.
Please tell me that you are familiar with all i’ve presented regarding the real content of “Multipolar World Order,” since ithis involved lots of material on my part. If you can’t recall, search through your email received messages or at the Lockdown Times Substack for such stuff. Such a search can easily be done by referring to the work of Iain Davis, Riley Waggaman, What’s Left? and Sebs Solomon.
Biomedical. Still can’t get sound on videos at Dr Bailey’s Substack, but i can fully play those that get posted at her other page. Here she tackles placebos and nocebos, bringing in her own experience supervising trials of pharmaceuticals.
Placebo vs. Nocebo: The Battle for Your Body, Dr Sam Bailey, 6/16/25, posted at her Substack 6/17/25.
When Mark and I were trained as medical doctors we were advised that it was “unethical” to give placebos, even if it cured the patient. We then worked in clinical trials research where both the placebo effect and its opposite, the nocebo effect were considered to be annoying phenomena. The pharmaceutical industry also had its own definition of “placebo”, including the injection of toxic aluminium adjuvants.
However, as we moved even further from the allopathic ‘Killing Fields’, we realised that there was something wrong with this whole paradigm. The insight coincided with our republishing the work and wisdom of Dr Ulric Williams in the book Terrain Therapy. The issue is also something that Daniel Roytas has examined, as evidenced in his pivotal publication Can You Catch A Cold?
In this video I will outline the history of the placebo and nocebo effects and how the concepts have been corrupted. It is something that is important to everyone as it includes some of the real reasons why you get sick. However, as we will see, there is a very simple path to true health and prosperity through right thinking and right living.
[Video. 18 minutes, plus references]
My comment at the Substack page.
Jeffrey Strahl, Lockdown Times, 6/18/25.
Many thanks again, Dr Sam Bailey. I watched via your other web page. The study in which the nocebo effect led to people experiencing symptoms of chemotherapy even though they had not undergone it, simply because they were told they had, is astounding.
And i can testify regarding this effect back when "COVID" started. I had a bunch of dreams about either choking on my snot, or having to line up to go to a single bathroom while i was feeling diarrhea coming on. This was in the first week or two. I was lucky to hook up with a friend i had known via being a 9/11 Truth activist (she in fact informed me of a new group forming around that back in early 2002). I joined a list she had started, and via sharing stuff we started questioning what we were being told.
I still underwent a couple of scares, but then started firming up. And by mid April 2020 i felt a major change. I have not experienced any issues which seriously hampered me since them. Looking at my journals of past years, i noticed i had a pattern of getting badly congested in April-June. probably allergies but in "the old days" attributed to a viral infection, which i "fought" via all sorts of ugly substances. Nowadays, i just do nasal rinses, meti pot or otherwise, change what i eat,.... I so highly appreciate the work that you and Mark and our associates have done in freeing us from the sick debilitating mentality.
4IR. The two latest from Jeff Snider about the deflation H-Bomb.
The first deals with new data from China. especially banking and real estate. Snider reminds us how measures undertaken by the Chinese government have failed primarily because the crisis is global.
This Is What a Banking Crisis Looks Like. Jeff Snider/Eurodollar University, 6/16/25, 21 minutes.
"Nine months later, China's bazooka has totally flopped. We have all the proof necessary. But the "stimulus" failure is not even the biggest takeaway. The full story behind it starts with banks, detours into massive volatility in Hong Kong, before ending up with zombies. Seriously.”
Ending this segment and this edition, the second is about the latest US data regarding consumer spending and sentiment.
Airlines Just Issued a MASSIVE Warning About Consumer Behavior, , 6/17/25, 17 minutes.
"Struggling airlines grappling with staycations offer insight into consumer behavior. Meanwhile, the government also showed spending on goods (and certain key services) tanked again in May. Even the world's biggest entertainers and their concert tours are suddenly having a hard time. The dreaded pullback keeps getting louder and more confirmed.”