NEVER Trust Chomsky. Ever!

Alan Dershowitz inoculated me early on against trusting anything from Noam Chomsky, no matter how benign. But it appears the vaccine wears off with time.

Chomsky derides the lack of skin in the game by opinionated parties far-removed (do his ears hear his own mouth?!), quoting Chaim Weizmann.

Proponents of each of the national movements are quick to dismiss the competing claims. I will not review the familiar debate. It is a simple and pointless exercise to construct an argument to demonstrate the legitimacy of the claims of either side and the insignificance of the demands of its opponent. Each argument is convincing in its own terms. Each claim is, in a sense, absolute: a plea for national survival. Those who urge the demands of one or the other partner in this deadly dance, deaf to conflicting pleas, merely help pave the way to an eventual catastrophe. Such behavior is pathetic on the part of direct participants; disgraceful, on the part of those partisans from afar who will not have to pay the costs of their fanaticism. One may recall Chaim Weizmann’s rebuke to American Zionists for urging “other people to the barricades to face tanks and guns”—“the speeches are made in New York,” Weizmann added, “while the proposed resistance is to be made in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.” The same might be said—and probably has been—by Palestinians with regard to those who urge them on towards self-destruction.

I almost believed him. Almost. Then I checked.

As it turns out, Weizmann was giving praise.

In October 1946 eleven new Jewish settlements were established in the Negev in a single night, aimed at ensuring that the Negev would be included within the boundaries of the State…

The 22nd Zionist Congress opened in Basle on 9 December 1946. The new Negev settlements, Weizmann told the delegates, ‘have, in my deepest conviction, a far greater weight than a hundred speeches about resistance – especially when the speeches are made in New York, while the proposed resistance is to be made in Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem’.

A Conspiracy Thought: Maybe Corona Was All About Cutting the Number of Beneficiaries?

Mass Murder Has Always Been Politically Acceptable

War is the Health of the State” wrote Randolph Bourne in 1918.  Ever wonder what it means?

Gary North wrote extensively about what he called the Great Default, a time when government could no longer kick the can on financing its wealth-depleting welfare/warfare state.  He cites a 1999 book by former CFR president Peter G. Peterson, Gray Dawn: How the coming age will transform America—and the world, in which Peterson writes:

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and federal civilian and military pensions — will exceed total federal revenues by the year 2030. This would leave zero tax revenue for any other purpose — not even for interest payments not for national defense nor for education nor for child health, nor for the federal payroll. Not a penny available for anything else.

Politicians have long ignored unavoidable doom because cutting benefits or raising taxes are politically toxic.  Yet the problems won’t go away.  What’s a scheming politician to do?

Cut the number of beneficiaries

In 2019 they came up with a plan, Event 201.  To this day most people either don’t know about it or consider it another conspiracy theory.  What if a bug, a virus, wiped out a significant number of old people?  Wouldn’t that ease the stress on the welfare state, at least delay its collapse?

Further, what if this bug really wasn’t terribly lethal — let’s not kill the “wrong” people, for God’s sake — but could be promoted as on a par with the Spanish Flu?  Surely that would scare the devil out of those who trust government pronouncements.  And to make it more lethal, what if the health care systems could be incentivized to deliver “solutions” that killed on their own?  (See here, too.). Let the treatments do the killing.

And what if authorities went further by banning or discouraging early treatments that might have precluded the need for a warp speed, poorly-tested vaccine?   Such early treatments to include not just hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, but supplements such as vitamins D, C, melatonin, and zinc?  (See here for D.) Further yet, what if major social media companies could be “persuaded” to censor distinguished medical researchers who tried to expose the fraud for what it was?

And what if the politicians got into the act by imposing restrictions on behavior as a means of fighting this terrible virus?  What if the restrictions included not only lockdowns, masks, and social distancing, but the closing of “non-essential” businesses, the determination of which would be left to their corrupt judgment and which would include gyms and churches?

What if, as the deaths and injuries piled up, public health reps and the media ignored or downplayed the incriminating statistics in public databases such as VAERS?

And what if, as the vaccines were rolled out prematurely, those who refused the vaccine were demonized as threats to the established order?  What if only the vaccinated were allowed the freedom to board airplanes or cross borders, or hold government jobs?  What if unvaccinated people, including health care workers who were on the front lines fighting the virus before vaccines were available, were condemned as “anti-vaxers” and fired from their jobs?

What if the vaccinated started to die suddenly, and the deaths from all causes far exceeded previous years?  Would people continue to believe the vaccines were “safe and effective”?  Would they continue to leave those beliefs unexamined and await further orders from the bureaucrats?

Yes, because major institutions they trust and dare not contradict, such as government schools, the FDA, CDC, AMA, even the NFL, et al would still be demanding obedience to the narrative.  Exercise due diligence?  What’s that?

All this and more is unthinkable among people who still regard reason as their means of survival.  But even irrationality sometimes has a decipherable logic, which in the case of the virus is: For each person who dies it is one less body off government’s back.  If enough die government might be fiscally solvent, assuming the survivors continue to pay taxes.  Biden’s new IRS army will help ensure they do.

Continue reading…

From LRC, here.

Corona Craze: The Simple Questions Only Some Were Asking

“Crazy” Questions Everyone Should Have Asked About Covid-19

One of the most astonishing things about the past two-plus years and counting has been how asking certain questions gets one branded as “crazy,” “stupid,” “conspiracy theorist,” etc.  Questions that, had you asked “Before COVID,” would have been … normal.

So let’s dig into our closets and put on our now-sort-of-out-of-fashion clothes, get into a time machine and travel back to, say, 2014. (I pick 2014 to “control” for the Trump Derangement Syndrome that gripped about half the country and most media the next year.)

Government officials and media breathlessly tell us that a deadly virus is rampant, and that we must take particular measures, including vaccinating everyone. Before rolling up your sleeve for an injection, you would questions.

Regarding the illness, you would ask:

What is the severity of the illness?

What is my risk of being infected?

If I’m infected, what is my risk of hospitalization?

If I’m infected, what is my risk of death?

What is the actual risk of other people, and if anyone is at significant risk, what can I do to reduce such risk (“protect others”)?

If people have been reported to have died from the virus or become severely ill from it, how was causation determined? Are we sure the illness was the cause?

Do the people reporting the deaths/severe illness have any incentive to report them as deaths/severe illness from the virus as opposed to from another cause?

Regarding Proposed Non-Medical Interventions (lockdowns, social distancing, masking, etc.) you would ask:

What is the purpose of each proposed intervention?

What is the likelihood that any particular intervention will achieve such purpose?

What are the possible harms and costs of each intervention?

Can the purpose be achieved without the intervention?

If not, can the harms and costs be reduced?

What data are being relied on in support of such interventions, especially unprecedented ones?

Regarding any proposed medical intervention (such as a “vaccine”), you would ask:

Are there tried and true safe drugs that can be repurposed to treat people infected with the illness?

Who are the manufacturers of this new vaccine, what is their track record, and what are their incentives to make drug?

What are the ingredients?

How does it work?

If the drug has novel biotech, how does it work?

What does the drug purport to do?

Does the drug purport to prevent infection?

Does the drug purport to prevent transmission?

Does the drug purport to reduce symptoms?

What testing has been done, and what things were tested? The drug’s ability to prevent infection or transmission?  Reduce symptoms?  Safety and side effects?

What were the test results?

How was the testing done? On whom? How long? Etc.

What incentives do those who did the testing and who reported results have to say the testing was done properly and thoroughly and that the tests were passed?

Are all the data from the tests available for independent review? If not, why not?

If data and answers to these questions aren’t forthcoming, why shouldn’t we assume that there is a cover up of “bad” information?

If there are long term risks we don’t know about, why not take a toe-in-the water approach instead of diving into murky waters headfirst? That is, why not use the drug only on those most in danger from the illness?

Legality

Do the people proposing such interventions have legal authority to do so?

Is there democratic buy-in/support for these interventions?

Has buy-in been achieved without lies, censorship, double-talk, and coercion?

How are people who ask questions being treated?

Finally, we would ask, Have any of the authorities been caught lying about any of this? If so, what are the lies? Why should we believe anything else they say?

Conclusion

At least two things are mighty clear.

First, the COVID-19 debacle — meaning not only the deaths from the illness but the collateral damage from the response — would not have occurred had these questions been asked prominently and often by a critical mass of citizens and in “mainstream” media. We would have stopped after the first set of questions regarding the severity of the illness!  There was no need to do anything beyond staying home when sick and washing one’s hands regularly and taking extra care around unhealthy people.

Second, not only did a critical mass of people fail to ask basic questions, but many people, perhaps most prominently the “educated,” denounced, bullied, and harassed anyone who did. These “educated” bullies even proposed and supported grotesque coercions, including shunning, barring the “unvaccinated” from going into stores and restaurants — and earning a living.

The official response to COVID-19 was a 180-degree flipping of traditional rational thinking.  We do know that government and media (paid by governments) made unprecedented efforts to get people to invert their own common sense and not ask very basic questions. We should ask how and why that happened.

From LRC, here.

Meanwhile, in Austrailia…

Truth-Speaking Doctor Blows up AMA Conference

DR William Bray, a Queensland doctor who gave up his licence to practice in order to expose the lies and deceit behind Covid19 and the dangers of mRNA vaccines, has crashed the national conference of the Australian Medical Association, calling Australia’s Health Department secretary Prof Brendan Murphy a liar and citing the high rate of mRNA vaccine fatalities as revealed in the Quatar Study. A video of Dr Bray’s protest was posted on the Concerned Lawyers Network page on Telegram.

The three-day conference held in Sydney and online from July 29-31 featured guests such as Dr Anthony Fauci, Prof Brendan Murphy, Dr Vijay Roach, Dr Anne Tonkin and Dr Raina MacIntyre. Sessions focused heavily on woke/politically correct topics such as “cultural safety”, “climate change”, and “gender equity”.

It’s hardly surprising that Australia’s medical establishment has partaken in the Covid19 scam when it entertains woke ideology at official levels, but that is the nature of globalisation forces seeking to control all institutions.

Dr Bray called on his colleagues to join with the people of Australia and to “stop forcing mRNA vaccines on people who are getting killed by them”. “Professor Doctor Paul Kelly is a liar and he is gaslighting you. There is only a 0.27% fatality rate from the infection and natural immunity has been proven recently in a Quatar study to give you 97.3% protection for life against all variants.”

Dr Bray told those assembled that they were on notice from the people of Queensland through the Queensland People’s Protest. Many of those present in the conference room began to pick up their bags and scuttle for the door like cockroaches as Dr Bray continued to expose the scandal.

As hotel security staff began to escort Dr Bray out of the room, he began a chant: “One shot, two shots, three shots, four. How many shots until you hit the floor!”

Outside the conference, Dr Bray warned NSW people that Queensland’s Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Amendment and Other Legislation Bill 2022 would apply in all states and territories and change the focus of medical care from the patient to “the greater good”.

The Bill appears to focus on further national control and standardization of medical practice and care. The Bill proposes a national registration and accreditation scheme to ensure “that only health practitioners who are suitably trained and qualified to practise in a competent and ethical manner are registered”.

“The tyranny is escalating dramatically, that is why I have come out today and I have thrown away my medical licence in front of the chief medical officer Dr Paul Kelly, so help him God, because I will stand with you and I will not stand with those traitors to the medical ethics over there,” said Dr Bray, pointing to the conference venue.

Meanwhile, the Covid criminality continues with Australia’s TGA approving the Moderna vaccines for children aged six months to five years, despite the fact that infants have strong immune resistance to Covid and disturbing cases of harm and death caused to infants whose mothers took mRNA vaccines.

This originally appeared on Cairns News.

Remember ‘Fifteen Days to Slow the Spread’?

Ugly Covid Lies

After two years of unprecedented government tyranny in the name of fighting a virus, the prime instigators of this infamy are walking free, writing books, and openly pretending they never said the things they clearly said over and over.

Take Trump’s White House Covid response coordinator Deborah Birx, for example. She was, as the Brownstone Institute’s Jeffrey Tucker points out in a recent article, the principal architect of the disastrous “lockdown” policy that destroyed more lives than Covid itself. Birx knew that locking a country down in response to a virus was a radical move that would never be endorsed. So, as she admits in her new book, she lied about it.

She sold the White House on the out-of-thin-air “fifteen days to slow the spread” all the while knowing there was no evidence it would do any such thing. As she wrote in her new book, Silent Invasion, “I didn’t have the numbers in front of me yet to make the case for extending it longer, but I had two weeks to get them.”

She was playing for time with no evidence. As it turns out, she was also destroying the lives of millions of Americans. The hysteria she created led to countless businesses destroyed, countless suicides, major depressions, drug and alcohol addictions. It led to countless deaths due to delays in treatment for other diseases. It may turn out to be the most deadly mistake in medical history.

As she revealed in her book, she actually wanted to isolate every single person in the United States! Writing about how many people would be allowed to gather, she said: “If I pushed for zero (which was actually what I wanted and what was required), this would have been interpreted as a ‘lockdown’—the perception we were all working so hard to avoid.”

She wanted to prevent even two people from meeting. How is it possible that someone like this came to gain so much power over our lives? One virus and we suddenly become Communist China?

Last week in a Fox News interview she again revealed the extent of her treachery. After months of relentlessly demanding that all Americans get the Covid shots, she revealed that the “vaccines” were not vaccines at all!

“I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection,” she told Fox. “And I think we overplayed the vaccines. And it made people then worry that it’s not going to protect against severe disease and hospitalization.”

So when did she know this? Did she know it when she told ABC in late 2020 that “this is one of the most highly-effective vaccines we have in our infectious disease arsenal. And so that’s why I’m very enthusiastic about the vaccine”?

If she knew all along that the “vaccines” were not vaccines, why didn’t she tell us? Because, as she admits in her book, she believes it’s just fine to lie to people in order to get them to do what she wants.

She admits that she employed “subterfuge” against her boss – President Donald Trump – to implement Covid policies he opposed. So it should be no surprise that she lied to the American people about the efficacy of the Covid shots.

The big question now, after what appears to be a tsunami of vaccine-related injuries, is will anyone be forced to pay for the lies and subterfuge? Will anyone be held to account for the lives lost for the arrogance of the Birxes and Faucis of the world?

From LRC, here.