Connect with us

Government

The COVID-19 Scamdemic, Part 1: The Hard Road To A New World Order

The COVID-19 Scamdemic, Part 1: The Hard Road To A New World Order

Published

on

The COVID-19 Scamdemic, Part 1: The Hard Road To A New World Order Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2020 - 00:00

Authored by Iain Davis via In This Together blog,

Among many similar globalist states, The UK State is a public-private partnership between government, financial institutions, multinational corporations, global think tanks, and well funded third sector organisations, such as so called non governmental organisations (NGO’s) and large international charities.

Through a labyrinthine structure of direct funding, grant making and philanthropy, the UK State is a cohesive globalist organisation that works with selected academics, scientific institutions and mainstream media (MSM) outlets to advance a tightly controlled, predetermined narrative.

This designed consensus serves the the interests and global ambitions of a tiny group of disproportionately wealthy people.

This group of parasites, often misleadingly referred to as the “elite,” exploit all humanity for their own gain and to consolidate and enhance their power. They control the money supply and the global debt, which is a debt owed to them.

Human beings are forced to pay tax which, via government procurement, flows directly to the private corporations they own. War, security, infrastructure projects, education and health care provide profits and are used by the parasite class to socially engineer society.

Globally, they fund all political parties, with any realistic chance of gaining power, they own the MSM and spend billions lobbying policy makers.

Through think tanks and the actions of “independent” political activists, such as the FPAction Network, they directly fund political campaigns in exchange for the politician’s loyalty to them, not to the electorate.

Through their tax exempt grant making foundations, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), they control the scientific, medical and academic orthodoxy.

This global network of oligarchs is moving towards the final stages of its long held plan to construct a single global system of governance. Often referred to as the New World Order (NWO), it is a collaboration between supranational political organisations, like the United Nations and the European Union, controlled scientific authorities, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the World Health Organisation (WHO), global financial institutions, including the World Bank, IMF, ECB and Bank for International Settlements (BIS), globalist organisations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), NGO’s like the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and policy making thinks tanks such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Club of Rome and the Trilateral Commission.

The UK State is one, prominent tentacle of the emerging global governance system. It has capitalised on the COVID 19 crisis to create the conditions for a new global economic and political model. While COVID 19 appears to be a nasty strain of the common coronavirus, in Part 2 we will discuss how the UK State has spun a fake narrative about the disease to further the interests of it’s globalist, oligarch masters. Managing a response to a pandemic is merely the deceptive justification for the planned re-engineering of society.

In partnership with Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and the BMGF, the WEF were chief architects of Event 201 which plotted, in quite precise detail, the global lockdown and the world’s media response to a global coronavirus pandemic. Event 201 was staged merely a matter of months before a global coronavirus pandemic broke out. Both the government lockdown and MSM response have proceeded exactly as they predicted.

To say this is all just a coincidence, and not worthy of further scrutiny, is beyond obtuse. The WEF’s extensive and detailed COVID 19 Action Platform was up and running on March 12th 2020. The day after the WHO declared a global COVID 19 pandemic.

It is clear from the WEF’s own words, that they see COVID 19 as a fantastic opportunity. They state:

The Covid-19 crisis, and the political, economic and social disruptions it has caused, is fundamentally changing the traditional context for decision-making…….As we enter a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery, this initiative will offer insights to help inform all those determining the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons.”

This is a proposal for global governance which supersedes national sovereignty. It is as simple as that.

It is remarkable that there are still so many who accuse any who point to this long standing New World Order plan, extensively documented and spoken about by political leaders for generations, of being so called conspiracy theorists. One wonders if these people can read.

Referencing the COVID 19 opportunities, one of the founders, and current executive chairman, of the WEF Klaus Schwab recently wrote:

A sharp economic downturn has already begun, and we could be facing the worst depression since the 1930s. But, while this outcome is likely, it is not unavoidable. To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.

Capitalism requires a reset because the model of closed shop crony capitalism, operated by the global parasite class for centuries, has reached the limits of growth. Therefore they need to create a new economic paradigm (the Great Reset) both to further centralise and consolidate their power and to fix their failing business model.

Following the 2008 banking collapse, while the people were forced to suffer austerity to bail out the banks with a form of highly selective crony socialism, the parasite class simply carried on piling up the debt.

In the Basel Capital Accords III, supposedly designed to stop the wild market speculations of banks which caused the collapse, they effectively reduced the liquidity (capital reserve) requirements for banks, allowing them to lend even more.

This process of allowing banks to create FIAT currency out of nothing has inevitably led to a global debt of approximately $260 trillion, which is more than three times the size of the planets GDP.

However, this is small potatoes compared to the scale of the financial products derivatives market. Estimated to be somewhere between $600 trillion to more than $1 quadrillion. While some say this is only the notional amount of the debt tied up in derivative contracts, the fact remains this is all debt.

Cumulatively, there isn’t enough productivity on Earth even to service the interest on these debts, let alone pay them. Ultimately this is debt owed to the oligarchs who control the world’s system of central banks. It is a Mickey Mouse system allowing monopolists to seize assets using their own funny money.

While the power to create all FIAT currency, out of nothing but debt creation, has afforded them immense economic and political control, 2008 demonstrated that their usury fraud can, and certainly will, collapse. Hence the Great Reset. Responding to a pandemic, or saving lives, has nothing to do with it.

The process of transition, laid out by the WEF as the Great Reset, builds upon the sustainable development goals of the U.N’s Agenda 2030. Founded upon the generational eugenicist ideology of the NWO oligarchs, the new global governance system will be a technocracy.

While Technocracy, rule by technocrats appointed or elected for their particular expertise, may sound appealing to some, the model proposed relies upon the destruction of nations states to be replaced by a distant global technocratic order that serves only the interests of its founding oligarchs and financial benefactors.

This technocratic system was outlined in 1974 by former US ambassador Richard N. Gardner, member of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission, in his article The Hard Road To World Order:

Never has there been such widespread recognition by the world’s intellectual leadership of the necessity for cooperation and planning on a truly global basis. Never has there been such an extraordinary growth in the constructive potential of transnational private organizations - not just multinational corporations but international associations of every kind in which like-minded persons around the world weave effective patterns of global action...

...

The hope for the foreseeable future lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction... but rather in... inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis... providing methods for changing the law and enforcing it as it changes and developing the perception of common interests...

In short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down ...

...but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.

The institutions of limited jurisdiction, such as the IPCC and WHO, are already in place directing national government policy across the world. In Britain, it is the role of the UK State to deliver the obligatory policy changes in order to erode national sovereignty and create the global governance technocracy. All globalist states are essentially unconstitutional and treasonous.

The common interest, determined by the technocrat class at the behest of their corporate oligarch paymasters, is currently replacing individual liberties and freedoms. The human being is becoming little more than a unit to be managed and directed and, where necessary, disposed of.

Inalienable human rights are being ignored utterly in pursuit of the common interest.

The global COVID 19 crisis is a catalysing event which has been misused to bring about the Great Reset. In order to convince the people to comply with their orders, the UK State has inculcated the population into a state of fear.

States around the world have practised social engineering using deception, by proselytising an unquestioning faith in an illusory form of science (scientism), behaviour modification, unlawful regulation and propaganda. They have used their obedient MSM to convince their peoples that the threat of COVID 19 is significantly greater than it actually is.

In Part 2 we will focus on the deception of the UK State. However, the same can be said for all other globalist states that have similarly responded to the claimed pandemic.

COVID 19 has been exploited in order to replace our inalienable human rights with an enforced obligation to obey public health orders. Public health has become biosecurity and there is no longer any such thing as a healthy human being. All humans are now biohazards and biohazards must be controlled or removed from society for the common good.

With the British people living in unwarranted fear, the UK State has been able to introduce draconian anti-democratic (quite literally) legislation.

In other circumstances this would have been impossible without significant revolt. Terrorising the public was essential to convince them to believe that the State had to remove all their rights and freedoms in order to keep them safe.

Initially deceiving the public that the “emergency measures” would be temporary, further behaviour modification was then used to force people to comply with a lengthening list of totalitarian regulations. The objective was to move people towards passively accepting the dictatorship of a surveillance state re-branded as “the new normal.” Thus far, it appears most people have been sufficiently frightened to meekly accept their enslavement.

Throughout the Great Reset transition, the public face of the globalist project has been Bill Gates. However, while Gates has used his wealth to seize control of global public health policy, he is just the current front man for World Order 2.0. It is the technological possibilities presented by the 4th Industrial Revolution which the architects of the world order are capitalising upon.

For example, while there is no evidence that COVID 19 can be spread by handling cash, the MSM have repeatedly floated the idea. This is no surprise. the BBC are among the many media organisations directly funded by the BMGF.

Pilot schemes, such as the BMGF backed West African Wellness Pass, are already underway. By linking biometric identification, along the lines of the BMGF funded, Rockefeller and U.N backed ID 2020, with cashless payment systems, all transactions can be centrally controlled in the rapidly approaching cashless society.

When your biometric identity includes your vaccine immunity status, there will be no necessity to legislate to make vaccines “compulsory.” Thus avoiding any contentious public debate. As long as you fully comply with your orders, you will be allowed controlled access to social and economic activity.

Systems like immunity passport and vaccine certificates will be used to control freedom of movement, the right to work and to access services and the community. As described by world order spokesman Bill Gates:

Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”

While vaccines may not be compulsory you won’t realistically be able to participate in society, employment, run a business or receive benefits, without the appropriate vaccine or immunity status.

The BMGF have already invested more than $21 million in an MIT project to create a microneedle vaccine delivery system that will inject a reactive die under the recipients skin which can then be scanned by a reader. This pattern will act like an indelible bar code tattoo, enabling the global authorities to monitor and control your whereabouts and behaviour.

The New Zealand State has already decided to remove people from their homes and place them in quarantine facilities (detention centres controlled by the military).

With an estimated population of 5 million and just 22 alleged deaths from COVID 19 in the entire country (a population mortality risk of 0.0004%), and no deaths at all for nearly three months, clearly these measures are not a response to any genuine threat from COVID 19.

Having complete control over the testing and attribution of disease status affords the biosecurity State the power to potentially remove and detain its political enemies and dissenters without trial. Those ordered to enforce biosecurity, in the “new normal,” have exactly the same degree of authoritarian power that was invested in similar rights abusers such as the Gestapo and the Stasi. Does history ever teach us anything?

This quarantine policy in New Zealand is designed to maintain the level of fear and accustom the population to dictatorship. It also appears to be a provocation that may encourage insurrection and revolt. With a monopoly on violence and the use of force, violent uprisings invariably benefit the authoritarian State. It allows them to claim legitimacy for an even more oppressive “crack down.”

Thus far, the global response to COVID 19 has deviated little from the Rockefeller’s suggested Lockstep scenario in their 2010 report Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.

Like Event 201, this is another example of the quite extraordinary prescience of the people who form global governance policy. They can not only predict, in almost perfect detail, what the media will discover and report, but also nature itself.

Removing the “infected” from their homes and incarcerating them in detention centres mirrors the policy suggestion of Dr Michael Ryan from the WHO. While New Zealand is the first nominally democratic state to raid family homes and remove people by force, it certainly won’t be the last. The UK State has already given itself the power to do so in the Health Protections (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020.

World economic activity will be administered by biosecurity States and based upon sustainable development goals. This new, centrally planned, global economy will be restricted only to permitted businesses.

Prior to his departure as governor of the Bank of England, in lockstep with the Great Reset, Mark Carney warned that companies that don’t follow the correct sustainability policies, “will go bankrupt without question.” In other words, lines of credit, without which business cannot hope to function, will be limited only to those who adopt the approved polices.

This new economy will have very limited employment. Carney’s successor Andrew Bailey has already stated that it would be important not to keep people in “unproductive jobs” and that job losses, as a result of the COVID 19 crisis, were inevitable.

They would not have been inevitable had globalist State’s, like the UK, not responded to the crisis by shutting down the world’s productive economy.

The preposterous spin of the bankers and carefully chosen economists that the UK will simply bounce back from an unprecedented 20% drop in GDP is absurd. With official UK unemployment of 2.7 million, more than doubling in a single year, these numbers are merely the tip of a very large, looming iceberg.

There are currently an additional estimated 7.8 million British workers furloughed. That scheme is due to end in a couple of months. The management consultancy firm McKinsey & Company estimate that 7.6 million UK jobs are at risk.

This will, as ever, disproportionately impact the lowest paid, with analysis suggesting that more than 50% of those at risk of unemployment are already in jobs paying less than £10 per hour.

These are the unproductive jobs and livelihoods Bailey wants to get rid of. Across Europe and the Americas staggering levels of unemployment are seemingly unavoidable. It is not unreasonable to envisage at least 6 million long term unemployed in the UK. With the same pattern common to many developed nations, the social, economic and health impacts of this are almost beyond comprehension.

Many have long been warning, that the toll taken by the Lockdown response to the supposed COVID 19 pandemic will be far worse than the disease itself. This awful prospect is becoming increasingly apparent.

There is no reason to believe official UK COVID 19 statistics, something we’ll discuss in Part 2. However, even if we accept that more than 41,000 people have died as a direct result of COVID 19, this sad loss is likely to be relatively inconsequential compared to the loss of life as a direct result of the UK State’s Lockdown policy.

It is important to recognise that the global lockdown response was a political choice made to create the economic condition for the Great Reset. It was not unavoidable, and there is no evidence that lockdowns make any difference to COVID 19 mortality. South Korea, Japan and Sweden did not impose full lockdowns and all have better COVID 19 outcomes that the UK.

Research by the UK Department of Health, the Office of National Statistics (ONS), the government’s Actuary Department and the UK Home Office estimates that 200,000 people could die as a result of re-orientating the NHS, to treat COVID 19 and little else, and from the economic effects of Lockdown polices. Unfortunately, this “worst case” scenario appears conservative.

An example of the derisory “scientism” used to terrorise the population, in April the University of Glasgow published a study estimating average years of life lost (YLL) for individuals who allegedly died from COVID 19. Saying these were alleged deaths does not imply that no one died from COVID 19, only that we really have no idea how many.

Nonetheless, using quite bizarre methodology, the Glasgow researchers managed to calculate that the median YYL due to COVID 19 was 13 years for men and 11 years for women. This study was based upon analysis of the outbreak in Italy, but was cited by the UK MSM to scare the British. More than 59% of supposed COVID 19 decedents in Italy were over 80 years old.

Current median life expectancy in the UK is 80 years for males and 83 years for females. Nearly 60% of those who have died from COVID 19 in the UK were over 80 years old and 20% were over 90 years old.

Analysis from the National Records of Scotland (NRS) shows that median age of death, supposedly from COVID 19, was 81 for men and 85 for woman. Statistically indistinguishable from quite normal mortality.

The University of Glasgow researchers are funded by the Wellcome Trust who are the tax exempt philanthropic foundation of the multinational pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. The University of Glasgow are also grant recipients of the COVID 19 Therapeutics Accelerator established by the Wellcome Trust, Mastercard and the BMGF.

The Wellcome Trust and the BMGF want the world to be vaccinated with their experimental COVID 19 vaccines. Despite the fact that decades of trying have failed to produce a successful vaccine against SARS, or indeed for any coronavirus strain, and that usually vaccine development takes at least 10 years, GSK and the BMGF are among those who, for some apparently inexplicable reason, are confident they can produce a successful vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 in a matter of months.

Obviously there is a huge conflict of financial interest at the heart of the University of Glasgow’s spurious claims about YLL’s. Pointing out this fact makes you a conspiracy theorist. Though ignoring it requires either a considerable degree of gullibility or a wilful intent to deceive.

Between 2001 and 2016 economic and social deprivation in England consistently accounted for a genuinely alarming 9.3 year average reduced life expectancy (YLL’s) for males and, by 2016, shortened women’s lives by 7.4 years. The economic devastation that will be wrought by the entirely unnecessary Lockdown policy of the UK State, and others, measured in YLL’s, will dwarf those lost to COVID 19.

This is the price we will all pay for the parasite class’ determination to bring about the Great Reset and change the world’s economy and society to one centrally planned and controlled absolutely by them. They are currently spending billions globally on propaganda to convince us to accept their “new normal.”

They require our consent if their plans are going to work. This means, in order to scupper them, all we need to do is refuse to comply. While peaceful protest is an important unifying right, ultimately it is what we do every day that will make the difference. There is a nasty, fascist authoritarianism building in the UK, and elsewhere. Yet all we need to do in order to defeat it is refuse, en masse, to follow its orders.

Unfortunately, the UK State are among those throwing everything at convincing us to believe their frankly ridiculous, scientifically illiterate, COVID 19 propaganda narrative. We only need wander to the local supermarket and witness the faceless, muzzled majority to know the deception is working.

We are faced with an existential choice. We can either give up any childish pretensions that we live in a free and open democratic society that values liberty and plurality of opinion, and accept the fascist dictatorial rule of a global technocratic parasite, or we can exercise conscious resistance and refuse to comply with the orders of the State.

In Part 2, we will dissect the mechanism of the UK State’s scamdemic. While Lockdown policies originate at a global level, by looking at how the UK State has implemented them, and the deception they have used to convince the public to accept them, the true nature of the scamdemic can be revealed.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Pentagon Boss ‘Clarifies’ Russia & China Pose Biggest Threats After Biden Says It’s Climate Change

Pentagon Boss ‘Clarifies’ Russia & China Pose Biggest Threats After Biden Says It’s Climate Change

On Wednesday, President Biden told US troops stationed in the UK that the Joint Chiefs told him "the greatest threat facing America" is…

Published

on

Pentagon Boss 'Clarifies' Russia & China Pose Biggest Threats After Biden Says It's Climate Change

On Wednesday, President Biden told US troops stationed in the UK that the Joint Chiefs told him "the greatest threat facing America" is "global warming" - a curious pivot from "white supremacy."

On day later, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 'corrected' Biden, asserting instead that the biggest threats facing the US are China and Russia, according to US News, (and who allegedly had a big role in scamming half of pandemic unemployment funds to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars).

"Climate change does impact, but the president is looking at a much broader angle than I am," Army Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a congressional panel Thursday morning in response to a question by Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) "I'm looking at it from a strictly military standpoint. And from a strictly military standpoint, I'm putting China, Russia up there."

Milley then backpedaled a bit, saying "Climate change is a threat. Climate change has a significant impact on military operations, and we have to take that into consideration."

"Climate change is going to impact natural resources, for example," he told the Senate Armed Services Committee,adding, "It's going to impact increased instability in various parts of the world, it's going to impact migrations and so on."

When asked how his assessment that Russia and China pose the biggest threats, Milley said "This is not, however, in conflict with the acknowledgement that climate change or infrastructure or education systems– national security has a broad angle to it. I'm looking at it from a strictly military standpoint."

On Wednesday, Biden spoke to US forces at Royal Air Force Base Mildenhall, where he recounted an alleged discussion which took place while he was Vice President with the Joint Chiefs in their cloistered "tank" meeting room at the Pentagon.

"This is not a joke. You know what the Joint Chiefs told us the greatest threat facing America was? Global warming," he claimed.

In response to Biden's Wednesday comments, former President Trump issued a statement.

"Biden just said that he was told by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that Climate Change is our greatest threat. If that is the case, and they actually said this, he ought to immediately fire the Joint Chiefs of Staff for being incompetent," said Trump.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/11/2021 - 19:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

How Fanatics Took Over The World

How Fanatics Took Over The World

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

Early in the pandemic, I had been furiously writing articles about lockdowns. My phone rang with a call from a man named Dr. Rajeev Venkayya. He is the head.

Published

on

How Fanatics Took Over The World

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

Early in the pandemic, I had been furiously writing articles about lockdowns. My phone rang with a call from a man named Dr. Rajeev Venkayya. He is the head of a vaccine company but introduced himself as former head of pandemic policy for the Gates Foundation.

Now I was listening.

I did not know it then, but I’ve since learned from Michael Lewis’s (mostly terrible) book The Premonition that Venkayya was, in fact, the founding father of lockdowns. While working for George W. Bush’s White House in 2005, he headed a bioterrorism study group. From his perch of influence – serving an apocalyptic president — he was the driving force for a dramatic change in U.S. policy during pandemics.

He literally unleashed hell.

That was 15 years ago. At the time, I wrote about the changes I was witnessing, worrying that new White House guidelines (never voted on by Congress) allowed the government to put Americans in quarantine while closing their schools, businesses, and churches shuttered, all in the name of disease containment.

I never believed it would happen in real life; surely there would be public revolt. Little did I know, we were in for a wild ride…

The Man Who Lit the Match

Last year, Venkayya and I had a 30-minute conversation; actually, it was mostly an argument. He was convinced that lockdown was the only way to deal with a virus. I countered that it was wrecking rights, destroying businesses, and disturbing public health. He said it was our only choice because we had to wait for a vaccine. I spoke about natural immunity, which he called brutal. So on it went.

The more interesting question I had at the time was why this certified Big Shot was wasting his time trying to convince a poor scribbler like me. What possible reason could there be?

The answer, I now realized, is that from February to April 2020, I was one of the few people (along with a team of researchers) who openly and aggressively opposed what was happening.

There was a hint of insecurity and even fear in Venkayya’s voice. He saw the awesome thing he had unleashed all over the world and was anxious to tamp down any hint of opposition. He was trying to silence me. He and others were determined to crush all dissent.

This is how it has been for the better part of the last 15 months, with social media and YouTube deleting videos that dissent from lockdowns. It’s been censorship from the beginning.

For all the problems with Lewis’s book, and there are plenty, he gets this whole backstory right. Bush came to his bioterrorism people and demanded some huge plan to deal with some imagined calamity. When Bush saw the conventional plan — make a threat assessment, distribute therapeutics, work toward a vaccine — he was furious.

“This is bulls**t,” the president yelled.

“We need a whole-of-society plan. What are you going to do about foreign borders? And travel? And commerce?”

Hey, if the president wants a plan, he’ll get a plan.

“We want to use all instruments of national power to confront this threat,” Venkayya reports having told colleagues.

“We were going to invent pandemic planning.”

This was October 2005, the birth of the lockdown idea.

Dr. Venkayya began to fish around for people who could come up with the domestic equivalent of Operation Desert Storm to deal with a new virus. He found no serious epidemiologists to help. They were too smart to buy into it. He eventually bumped into the real lockdown innovator working at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.

Cranks, Computers, and Cooties

His name was Robert Glass, a computer scientist with no medical training, much less knowledge, about viruses. Glass, in turn, was inspired by a science fair project that his 14-year-old daughter was working on.

She theorized (like the cooties game from grade school) that if school kids could space themselves out more or even not be at school at all, they would stop making each other sick. Glass ran with the idea and banged out a model of disease control based on stay-at-home orders, travel restrictions, business closures, and forced human separation.

Crazy right? No one in public health agreed with him but like any classic crank, this convinced Glass even more. I asked myself, “Why didn’t these epidemiologists figure it out?” They didn’t figure it out because they didn’t have tools that were focused on the problem. They had tools to understand the movement of infectious diseases without the purpose of trying to stop them.

Genius, right? Glass imagined himself to be smarter than 100 years of experience in public health. One guy with a fancy computer would solve everything! Well, he managed to convince some people, including another person hanging around the White House named Carter Mecher, who became Glass’s apostle.

Please consider the following quotation from Dr. Mecher in Lewis’s book: “If you got everyone and locked each of them in their own room and didn’t let them talk to anyone, you would not have any disease.”

At last, an intellectual has a plan to abolish disease — and human life as we know it too! As preposterous and terrifying as this is — a whole society not only in jail but solitary confinement — it sums up the whole of Mecher’s view of disease. It’s also completely wrong.

Pathogens are part of our world; they are generated by human contact. We pass them onto each other as the price for civilization, but we also evolved immune systems to deal with them. That’s 9th-grade biology, but Mecher didn’t have a clue.

Fanatics Win the Day

Jump forward to March 12, 2020. Who exercised the major influence over the decision to close schools, even though it was known at that time that SARS-CoV-2 posed almost risk to people under the age of 20? There was even evidence that they did not spread COVID-19 to adults in any serious way.

Didn’t matter. Mecher’s models — developed with Glass and others — kept spitting out a conclusion that shutting down schools would drop virus transmission by 80%. I’ve read his memos from this period — some of them still not public — and what you observe is not science but ideological fanaticism in play.

Based on the timestamp and length of the emails, he was clearly not sleeping much. Essentially he was Lenin on the eve of the Bolshevik Revolution. How did he get his way?

There were three key elements: public fear, media and expert acquiescence, and the baked-in reality that school closures had been part of “pandemic planning” for the better part of 15 years. Essentially, the lockdowners, over the course of 15 years, had worn out the opposition. Lavish funding, attrition of wisdom within public health, and ideological fanaticism prevailed.

Figuring out how our expectations for normal life were so violently foiled, how our happy lives were brutally crushed, will consume serious intellectuals for many years. But at least we now have a first draft of history.

As with almost every revolution in history, a small minority of crazy people with a cause prevailed over the humane rationality of multitudes. When people catch on, the fires of vengeance will burn very hot.

The task now is to rebuild a civilized life that is no longer so fragile as to allow insane people to lay waste to all that humanity has worked so hard to build.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/11/2021 - 21:40

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Brandon Smith: The Real Reasons Why California Leftists Are Terrified Of The AR-15

Brandon Smith: The Real Reasons Why California Leftists Are Terrified Of The AR-15

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

This past week a US District judge in California struck down the state’s 30 year ban on high capacity semi-automa

Published

on

Brandon Smith: The Real Reasons Why California Leftists Are Terrified Of The AR-15

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

This past week a US District judge in California struck down the state’s 30 year ban on high capacity semi-automatic rifles which leftists label “assault weapons”. The judge called the ban unconstitutional (which it is). In response, the progressive media has lost their collective minds, screeching in horror at the idea of AR-15 rifles being legal within the borders of their carefully manicured socialist Utopia state. Their most commonly expressed reaction seems to be fear.

Fear is rarely a rational thing. When someone operates based on fear they tend to make terrible decisions and support oppressive causes and laws. Fear leads to an obsession with control. Fearful people also tend to look for large mobs of other terrified people so they can feel safe and secure and anonymous. They want to be able to act impulsively on their fears without having to face consequences for it later.

Leftists are driven primarily by two factors: Narcissism, and yes, fear. I’ve discussed their narcissism at great length in past articles; now I think we should delve into their fear.

The most common leftist retort to the question “Why are you so afraid of the AR-15?” will usually be a snort of indignant disbelief followed by the words:

“Because it’s a military weapon designed to kill a lot of people quickly…idiot!”

But this is not an argument, it is an expression of irrational fear. Why are they, as individuals, afraid of the AR-15? What are the chances that they will EVER be faced with a person intent on killing them with an AR-15? And, why do they believe that disarming innocent law abiding Americans will somehow save them from their paranoia?

Let’s examine the first issue of statistical probability; how many people are actually killed by AR-15s each year? Not many according to the FBI, which does not track the stats on specific rifles, but does track the stats on all rifles together. And, as it turns out, only around 6% of all gun deaths involve rifles in the US each year.

How much of that 6% involves the use of military grade rifles like the AR-15? It’s impossible to say, but even if it was half, or 3% of all gun related crimes, that would still mean you have FAR more of a chance of being murdered by a knife or blunt object than an AR. By extension, Rifles overall are dwarfed by handgun murders, so, again, why are leftists so afraid of the AR-15?

What about mass shootings? It seems like the AR-15 is a favorite among mass shooters because of it’s “efficiency”, so is this reason enough to be fearful? According to the New York Times own analysis, the AR-15 was used to kill 173 people in mass shootings in the US from 2007 to 2017. Meaning around 17 homicides per year over a decade can be attributed to the rifle. Again, the AR is dwarfed by almost all other weapons in homicide including knives, even when accounting for mass shootings.

With the sheer number of military grade weapons in the hands of civilians in the US there should be mass homicides everywhere you look if you take the common position of the typical progressive gun grabber. But, this is not the case. In fact, if you want to increase your chances of being killed by a gun, move to a major Democrat run city like Chicago, New York or Philadelphia. In Chicago, there were 4033 shootings and 784 homicides, predominantly in black neighborhoods and primarily with handguns.

So, statistically, access to AR-15s does not increase gun homicides. But what about living in a black neighborhood in leftist run Chicago under some of the strictest gun laws in the country? Yes, your chances of being shot are MUCH higher (just not by an AR-15).

Since the math does not add up in favor of the leftists, perhaps we should examine other factors that might be driving them to focus on the AR in particular. Let’s talk about “precedence”…

Look at it this way – States like California are a petri dish, a testing ground for the future that leftists want for the entire country. There is an old saying that “As goes California, so goes the US”, and this is because California is often where most experimental legislation is pushed; legislation that violates the boundaries of what the constitution allows. Sometimes it’s New York or New Jersey or some other blue state, but most of the time CA is where unconstitutional precedents are set. Its massive population and large number of electoral votes make it a perfect target for conditioning the wider public to further restrictions on their freedoms.

This explains some of the fear the media is showing regarding the latest federal court decision on military grade weapons like the AR. Political elites see California as their own little kingdom with their own special laws, and they plan to eventually spread those laws across America using California as the model. But, if such laws are overturned as unconstitutional, then the precedent actually works in reverse. Now, the leftists are concerned that an overturned gun ban in CA means more blue states will follow and their entire gun grabbing scheme will go out the window.

The leftist mind thinks in terms of unchecked and unhinged “democracy”. Meaning, they believe that the majority is paramount; the majority is law. If a majority in a society wants to take away your freedoms, then they have the right to because they have the mob on their side. 51% rules over the lives of the other 49%. But this is not how things work in a Constitutional Republic.

Under the Bill of Rights your freedoms are codified and sacrosanct. They are inherent and gifted by God (or whatever you happen to believe in); government has no domain over these rights. The right to firearms and self defense is one of these inherent qualities. It does not matter what the State of California thinks, or even what the “majority” of people in California think. If an American in California wants to own an AR-15, then he/she has the right to own an AR-15.

We also cannot ignore the fact that leftists have an insatiable appetite for collectivism, usually in the name of the “greater good”. Collectivism is basically totalitarianism disguised as humanitarianism. They know what’s best for you, and they are going to make sure you follow THEIR plan for your life.

The AR-15 is indeed a weapon in military use, and maybe this is what frightens leftists the most. Not because they are personally more likely to be shot by one (we’ve already proven that notion false), but because leftists desire control over all else, and with military grade weapons in the hands of the public control becomes much more difficult. ALL totalitarian governments seek to first disarm the people they intend to enslave or destroy. This is a fact.

When a group of people in power are working hard to remove defensive or even offensive weapons from your hands, it’s best to assume that their intentions are malevolent. They are not trying to help you, they are trying to help themselves.

They will deny this motive to the grave, but look at how the political left has been acting lately: They are the only people that have supported mass censorship of opposing viewpoints. They are the only people that are supported by international conglomerates and Big Tech companies. They are the only people that supported the pandemic lockdowns, which were completely useless in stopping the spread of covid, but they were very useful in killing hundreds of thousands of small businesses across the US. They are also the only people in favor of vaccine passports which would destroy the very fabric of our society and erase what is left of our freedoms.

It’s not really surprising that they want to disarm us as well.

Of course, they will claim that this argument is “silly”. After all, what can an AR-15 do against an Apache helicopter or a Abrams battle tank? Well, these rifles in the right hands can do a hell of a lot to stop a technologically advanced military, as we have seen for the past two decades in Afghanistan. Let us not play games; there is a reason why leftists and elites are obsessed with our disarmament. If military grade rifles were not a threat to them, then they would not be going after them so aggressively.

Finally, the mainstream media has rolled out all the typical propaganda tools when it comes to spinning the federal decision in CA, including attacking the judge and his character. Almost every single article on this issue focuses on the fact that the judge compared the AR-15 to a “Swiss Army knife”.

The left will continue to use this narrative as a means to distract from the real problem at hand because false conflations and straw man arguments have worked for them in the past. Clearly, the judge was not trying to say that an AR-15 and a Swiss Army knife are exactly the same, or that they are equally capable of killing people. The logical interpretation is that the AR-15 is a tool like any other tool, and it has multiple uses. It is a utilitarian object, not an inherently demonic death machine as leftists would have us believe.

Gun grabbers love to make the argument that firearms are only designed for one purpose: “Killing”. This is a lie. They are also tools for self defense. They are a means to defuse a violent situation before it even happens. There are thousands of videos on the web showing people with criminal intent running away from a Good Samaritan with a gun. There is no way of telling how many potential victims have been saved by the mere presence of a firearm, but the accounts are documented and numerous.

This is on top of all the other uses for guns, including hunting and sporting uses. So, yes, the judge is absolutely correct; an AR-15 is a multipurpose tool, just like a Swiss Army knife.

In my view, the gun control lobby in America is in the midst of a considerable decline, and maybe it is even about to die. The political left has long operated on the mantra that “the squeaky wheel gets the oil”. In other words, they think if they whine long enough and loud enough about an issue someone will come along and give them what they want just to shut them up, even if what they want is illogical or morally bankrupt.

This strategy has worked out for them for many decades so it’s not surprising that they keep using it, but times are changing. Now, the squeaky wheel gets no oil, at least not from gun owners. The squeaky wheel gets nothing.

Gun control is the big line in the sand for most law abiding conservatives and moderates, and we have grown tired of the debate because it’s no longer a debate, it’s a imposition of ideology and cultism. All the facts are on the side of gun owners. All the legal protections are on the side of gun owners. All the moral dynamics are on the side of gun owners. As long as we stand our ground, there is nothing that leftists can do about it.

They can continue to lie, they can continue to threaten and they can continue exploiting emotional arguments, but they’ll NEVER get the guns. And, as we have seen recently, we might even start returning some of those gun rights and rifles to states like California, where fear was used to cloud the public mind and people were conned into compliance.

What are California leftists and their comrades in other blue states really afraid of? They are afraid that their strategies are failing, that the public is getting wise to their games, that their incrementalism only works for so long, that their true intentions have become transparent, that their narcissism has blinded them to their own frailties, that the law is not their plaything and that every piece of constitutional ground they have stolen over the decades could be taken back from them in the blink of an eye; as fast as a speeding bullet.

Leftists and totalitarians fear the AR-15, but what they fear more is what it represents. And with each carefully placed practice shot at every gun range across America, they hear the crushing sound of inevitability.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/11/2021 - 22:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending