Global Research Editor’s Note

We bring to the attention of our readers this carefully documented analysis of the so-called “Storming of the Capitol” by David W. Mathisen. 

With regard to the coverage of the Wednesday Capitol Event, Global Research will be publishing opposing and contradictory points of view by several of our authors.

We are dealing with a complex and far-reaching political process. We are at the crossroads of a major political, economic and social crisis which has bearing on the future of the United States.

This crisis must be the object of debate and analysis rather than confrontation of opposing political narratives.

I am continuously surprised that men and women believe whatever the corporate media tells them, even after we see beyond any doubt that they have been lying to us for over 50 years about the murders of President John F. Kennedy, Dr.Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy, and about the events of September 11, 2001.

The supposed “Storming of the Capitol” that took place on January 06, 2021 does not make any sense on its face: there is simply no way a gaggle of “protestors” can burst into the Capitol Building unless they are deliberately allowed to do so.

Footage shown during the event has all the appearances of drama: stage-acting (and not very convincing acting, either).

But what about the supposed fatal shooting of one so-called protestor?

Let’s take a look at the footage and see the very serious questions that footage raises. These questions are not being addressed at all by anyone in the corporate media or the government.

And yet despite these obviously suspicious facts, there is a heavy psychological resistance to admitting the possibility that the media (as well as the men and women occupying government office) are lying to your face. It is much less threatening to believe the media rather than our own eyes. But it causes internal displacement to do so.

Please watch my video, The Capital Hill Fiasco   ” and consider these important questions.

Thank you for watching.

or click the screen shot below

Important Note:

Only a few hours after posting this video, the friendly face of censorship arrived in the form of an email from google / youtube informing me that my video had been taken down for “content containing malicious harassment,” along with a cartoon image of a referee blowing a whistle:

They also removed the video, along with the numerous positive comments provided by viewers from around the world, and for a time the blank screen where the video used to be stated that the video had been removed for violation of “harassment and cyberbullying.”

As you can see from the content of their email, these overseers of what content may be allowed into the public have included the patronizing consolatory statement that: “We know that this might be disappointing, but it’s important to us that YouTube is a safe place for all.”

Please note that “disappointing” is not the correct word to describe what is going on here.

This video provides analysis of an extremely important event which impacts everyone in the united states and indeed has interest for everyone in the world (since the behavior of the united states and its officials impacts men and women in many other nations).

For google and the persons they describe as “our team” of reviewers to declare that this analysis “violates our Community Guidelines” and to take it upon themselves to censor it is unconscionable.

I have since uploaded the video to another platform not controlled by google, and as you can see from the video there is no way to describe this video as harassing or bullying, and in fact the end of the video features a reference to Mahatma Gandhi and his strategy of non-violence.

In response to this censorship, I lodged a protest (youtube condescendingly terms it an “appeal”), which I have reproduced below (only 800 characters allowed):

Prior to being taken down, the video was seen by about 258 viewers, and had received about 43 “likes” and about 16 comments.

Thank you to those who liked and commented and shared, prior to the censorship of this content in violation of the inalienable right, articulated in the Bill of Rights as the First Amendment but obviously belonging to all men and women everywhere, regardless of the despicable efforts of petty tyrants to curtail that right, to freedom of speech and the press.

Note that misguided persons often rush in at this point to argue that “private corporations can do whatever they want: the First Amendment only restricts the federal government in the united states.”

That is untrue and mistaken.

Google and youtube can only exist in their present form and business model through the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is a gift of nature (or a gift of the gods, as the ancients would see it), much like the rivers and ports and oceans and soil of the land.

The electromagnetic spectrum is not a creation of any man or woman, any more than is the sea or the sunshine or the oil under the earth.

It is properly understood to belong to the public domain, belonging to the people of the nation (those allowed to be born into that nation by the gods), and thus companies such as google / you tube are permitted to use that spectrum at the good pleasure of the people (that’s why the government, which is supposed to represent the people, in a democracy, allocates spectrum and that is right and proper).

Thus, google and you tube do not have any undisputed right to “do whatever they want” with the spectrum that is loaned to them by the people or by their representative government.

It is very much akin to banks, who are tightly controlled by the government because as anyone who studies the matter will understand, banks are given a special privilege to issue money — a privilege that is “loaned” to them by the government, because that power belongs only to the representatives of the people.

If the banks abuse that privilege or violate their charter, it will be taken away. Google and you tube’s charters should have been taken away a long time ago already, along with other abusers of the inalienable rights given to all men and women — rights which it is the government’s first duty to protect and preserve.