Connect with us


The Diabolical Dozen: The Twelve “Most-Significant COVID Events”

The Diabolical Dozen: The Twelve "Most-Significant COVID Events"

Authored by Bill Rice via The Brownstone Institute,

When a new ‘medical’…



The Diabolical Dozen: The Twelve "Most-Significant COVID Events"

Authored by Bill Rice via The Brownstone Institute,

When a new ‘medical’ product causes millions of deaths and life-altering adverse events, this should qualify as a “significant event.”

I occasionally enjoy publishing “List” articles.

To me, these essays can provide larger context on important topics and can assist writers in their quest to connect dots that identify the key events that explain how we got to our “Twilight Zone” New Normal.

Today’s list is “The Dozen Most Important/Significant Events of Covid.” 

This compilation is of course one person’s opinion and the list and rankings are subject to later revisions as new facts or news emerge.

1. All Important ‘Truth-Seeking’ Organizations Became Completely Captured

COMMENT: This development largely occurred before “official” Covid, but I rank this development first because nothing that later occurred would have occurred if this hadn’t taken place. That is, if just a few important organizations weren’t completely captured, the world might not have been (forever?) changed.

Little did we know in 1983 how much influence this man would later have on the world.

In hindsight, the emergence of Anthony Fauci as the leader of the most important US government “science” agency was very significant. Fauci’s influence spiked tremendously after the AIDS scare of the early and mid-1980s. That is, one needs to employ a longer-term historic view to fully appreciate what’s happening today… and why and how these things happened.

(Of course, I could go back much further – like to the Rockefeller Foundation, but to save space, I’ll do that later). 

2. Experimental mRNA ‘Vaccines’ Were Created and Then Administered…

The shots were often mandatory or at least coerced with those who refused to get their shots often experiencing myriad negative consequences. The rollout of Covid shots and then “boosters” has to be at or near the top of my list because these injections (received by billions of people) likely produced millions of life-altering adverse events and deaths.

3. Chinese Officials Notify the World Health Organization That a ‘Novel’ Virus That Causes Pneumonia-Like Symptoms has Been Identified in Wuhan, China…

Chinese officials contacted officials at the WHO on December 31, 2019. 

Comment: If officials hadn’t made this observation and phone call, it’s very possible nobody would have ever heard of a new coronavirus and the disease dubbed “Covid-19” would never have been identified. No phone call to the WHO likely = “no draconian Covid responses.”

4. The Covid PCR Test is Created, Patented, and – After Approximately Mid-March 2020 – Widely Administered…

Comment: Absent the creation and regulatory approval of the PCR diagnostic test, a Covid pandemic probably wouldn’t have even happened. For example, before the PCR test was created and then widely utilized, no Covid pandemic existed.

5. Large Numbers of ‘Covid Deaths’ are Identified First in Northern Italy and Then in Cities like New York, New Orleans, and Detroit…

Comment: Everyone who allegedly died from Covid reportedly had “tested positive” via the PCR test. Absent this test, these deaths wouldn’t have been labeled as “Covid deaths.” 

In retrospect, it was important that millions of new “cases” be identified, but, just as importantly, that some large percentage of these cases were later cited as the cause of large numbers of deaths. Thus, we had not just a “novel virus,” but a “deadly” virus as well.

It’s also worth noting that Covid “cases” can and are labeled as “asymptomatic.” That is, all cases of “Covid” are not “medical cases” that require medical treatment. One word – “cases” – ended up producing unprecedented fear/panic in the population. This fear was used to justify…

6. Almost in Unison, in Nations Around the World, Presidents and Prime Ministers Ordered Lockdowns…

to prevent spread of this “deadly” new virus and/or to “slow the curve” and/or to prevent hospitals from being over-run with “Covid” patients.

Comment: These national leaders were acting on the advice of “public health experts” (like Anthony Fauci and the UK’s Jeremy Farrar). Governors, mayors, and bureaucrats at various “public health agencies” actually enforced and implemented the lockdowns. It was a team effort of mass groupthink.

7. No Significant Organization or Leaders Challenged the Necessity of Global Lockdowns…

COMMENT:  “Significant Events” include not only policies and mandates that did ensue, but events that did not occur. 

No pushback regarding the “Covid response” is the best example of potentially important actions that did not occur. 

Another example is that no investigations were ever pursued that might establish that many people had already become sick with symptoms that were almost identical to Covid-19. Because of this, the public never learned that this alleged “deadly” virus might not have been “deadly” at all.

(This, I’m pretty sure, explains why my “early spread” articles have been ignored by everyone who matters.)

8. The Censorship Industrial Complex Exerts its Control; ‘Spreading Disinformation’ Becomes a Life-Changing Offense…

Comment: The legacy “mainstream” media and almost all of the social media platforms outlawed,  deplatformed, or restricted the reach of views that challenged the “authorized narrative” put forth by the official experts. 

This effort was clearly coordinated and included many government officials. Because of this program, most people in the world were never aware that the claims of officials might be dubious, spurious, or false. 

Because of these censorship and intimidation programs, fear remained widespread, which made most citizens go along with draconian responses like lockdowns, masks, and, later, coerced or mandatory “vaccines.”

Also, “disinformation, misinformation, and mal-information” programs were expanded to make many non-Covid topics taboo or disallowed. For example, questioning election results, the narrative that “Russia hacked an election,” or protesting the carnage that resulted from the George Floyd “protests” (riots) were now risky or even banned “free speech” exercises. 

In short, Covid speech rules were expanded to intimidate or punish people who hold views that do not match those of the Establishment classes.

Arguably, the brazen attack on free speech and the jaw-dropping growth of the “Censorship Industrial Complex” is the most significant event in world history as this precludes or neuters skepticism, the practice of the real Scientific Method (and even the Socratic Method), and allows those with absolute power to acquire even more power and control.

9. The Death of ‘Transparency…’

Comment: Increasingly, official or important data is now kept from the public. Requests for information are ignored or, when some documents are belatedly produced (after expensive and time-consuming Freedom of Information Requests are filed), the documents are heavily redacted.  

Documents and data that should not be “top secret” and have nothing to do with “national security” are increasingly labeled as “top secret” and off-limits to the public.

Take-away: As it turned out, the “public” does not have a “right to know…” even about issues that directly and indirectly affect the lives of every member of the public. “Informed consent” is no longer possible.

10. One Covid-Mitigation Measure – Mail-In Ballots – Made Election Fraud Far More Likely or Easy to Achieve…

….which would threaten legitimate or trust-worthy democratic elections.

11. The Department of Justice, FBI, and Most Members of Congress Made an Example of the January 6 ‘Insurrectionists’…

On the surface this event had nothing to do with Covid. However, the arrest and detention of so many innocent protesters sent the message that any dissenters who try to speak on any non-authorized topic will be harshly punished by the State. 

The treatment of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is another example where this important “message” was sent by the State. The message: “We are in charge. Do not challenge our control or this is what will happen to you.”

12. Vaccine Passports and ’15-Minute Cities’ are Created…

Comment: Under the guise of protecting the vaccinated from the non-vaccinated, digital surveillance becomes commonplace. (Largely unstated was the fact that if a “vaccine” really worked, the vaccinated wouldn’t have to worry about contracting this disease from the non-vaccinated). 

Among the world’s liberty defenders, the great fear is that vaccine passports will be expanded to monitor myriad “dangerous” or “harmful” activities, including efforts to reduce one’s “carbon footprint” to fight an ever greater health threat than Covid…Climate Change. 

This is already happening in many cities, which are dubbed “15-minute cities.” The idea is that people should be allowed to travel only about 15 miles from their homes, which will reduce their carbon footprint, which will, supposedly, help save the planet.

Of course, the main idea is that people can be controlled and monitored by digital surveillance, which was widely implemented for the first time during the hysteria of Covid.

If even more digital surveillance and “social credit” initiatives are implemented (including digital currency, which might effectively ban cash transactions), this item would also move much higher up my list of “most significant events of our Covid times.” 

As Dr. Meryl Nass and others are trying to warn the world, secret deliberations currently taking place to give the World Health Organization total control over “health emergencies” would make such “solutions” far more likely to occur in the future.

Not all Developments Were Negative…

I should note I can identify a few positive developments in the last four or so years. For example…

Substack became a popular writers’ platform and much of the narrative-challenging commentary and research emanated from these Substack authors, writers, and thinkers most of us would have never heard of if Substack had not been created. 

Millions of world inhabitant learned we are not alone…that plenty of other people think like we do, which has no doubt neutered the effort to “isolate” dissenters (although, arguably, we have been “herded” into a few corrals of contrarian free speech.)

At this writing, it remains to be seen if Substack’s potential growth and influence will be allowed to continue.

Brownstone Institute emerged as a force for sanity and leadership against authoritarianism.

Elon Musk bought Twitter, now X, which, largely, allows free speech. However, it’s clear that a coordinated effort (for example, from orchestrated advertising bans) has been organized to neuter or shutdown X as it’s currently operating.

More than 90 percent of the world opted – via their own free will – to pass on future Covid boosters. It’s even possible that fewer people are now getting their annual flu “vaccines.”

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. managed to write and publish perhaps the most important non-fiction book of our times, The Real Anthony Fauci. Despite never being reviewed by a mainstream newspaper or magazine, the book still became the No. 1 non-fiction best-seller in the world for many months. 

The book does an excellent job chronicling Covid lies, but its real significance is probably that it made far more people question the entire government-run healthcare/science establishment.

From autism to statins to anti-depressants, millions of people who never questioned the “pill-for-every-ill” narrative are now doing so. Kennedy is also running for president although every Establishment organization is  (of course) conspiring to defeat his campaign.

A yuppie-looking journalist named Tucker Carlson became the most popular journalist on the planet … but was fired by Fox News after his narrative-questioning went a bridge too far. Still, the fact that a prominent journalist like Carlson became immensely popular with so many citizens is probably worth noting.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/07/2024 - 08:10

Read More

Continue Reading


Supreme Court Rules Public Officials May Block Their Constituents On Social Media

Supreme Court Rules Public Officials May Block Their Constituents On Social Media

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis…



Supreme Court Rules Public Officials May Block Their Constituents On Social Media

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Public officials may block people on social media in certain situations, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on March 15.

People leave the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Feb. 21, 2024. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

At the same time, the court held that public officials who post about topics pertaining to their work on their personal social media accounts are acting on behalf of the government. But such officials can be found liable for violating the First Amendment only when they have been properly authorized by the government to communicate on its behalf.

The case is important because nowadays public officials routinely reach out to voters through social media on the same pages where they discuss personal matters unrelated to government business.

When a government official posts about job-related topics on social media, it can be difficult to tell whether the speech is official or private,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the nation’s highest court.

The case is separate from but brings to mind a lawsuit that several individuals previously filed against former President Donald Trump after he blocked them from accessing his social media account on Twitter, which was later renamed X. The Supreme Court dismissed that case, Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute, in April 2021 as moot because President Trump had already left office.

At the time of the ruling, the then-Twitter had banned President Trump. When Elon Musk took over the company he reversed that policy.

The new decision in Lindke v. Freed was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Respondent James Freed, the city manager of Port Huron, Michigan, used a public Facebook account to communicate with his constituents. Petitioner Kevin Lindke, a resident of Port Huron, criticized the municipality’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including accusations of hypocrisy by local officials.

Mr. Freed blocked Mr. Lindke and others and removed their comments, according to Mr. Lindke’s petition.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled for Mr. Freed, finding that he was acting only in a personal capacity and that his activities did not constitute governmental action.

Mr. Freed’s attorney, Victoria Ferres, said during oral arguments before the Supreme Court on Oct. 31, 2023, that her client didn’t give up his rights when using social media.

This country’s 21 million government employees should have the right to talk publicly about their jobs on personal social media accounts like their private-sector counterparts.”

The position advocated by the other side would unfairly punish government officials, and “will result in uncertainty and self-censorship for this country’s government employees despite this Court repeatedly finding that government employees do not lose their rights merely by virtue of public employment,” she said.

In Lindke v. Freed, the Supreme Court found that a public official who prevents a person from comments on the official’s social media pages engages in governmental action under Section 1983 only if the official had “actual authority” to speak on the government’s behalf on a specific matter and if the official claimed to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social media posts.

Section 1983 refers to Title 42, U.S. Code, Section 1983, which allows people to sue government actors for deprivation of civil rights.

Justice Barrett wrote that according to the so-called state action doctrine, the test for “actual authority” must be “rooted in written law or longstanding custom to speak for the State.”

“That authority must extend to speech of the sort that caused the alleged rights deprivation. If the plaintiff cannot make this threshold showing of authority, he cannot establish state action.”

“For social-media activity to constitute state action, an official must not only have state authority—he must also purport to use it,” the justice continued.

State officials have a choice about the capacity in which they choose to speak.

Citing previous precedent, Justice Barrett wrote that generally a public employee claiming to speak on behalf of the government acts with state authority when he speaks “in his official capacity or” when he uses his speech to carry out “his responsibilities pursuant to state law.”

“If the public employee does not use his speech in furtherance of his official responsibilities, he is speaking in his own voice.”

The Supreme Court remanded the case to the 6th Circuit with instructions to vacate its judgment and ordered it to conduct “further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Also on March 15, the Supreme Court ruled on O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, a related case. The court’s sparse, unanimous opinion was unsigned.

Petitioners Michelle O’Connor-Ratcliff and T.J. Zane were two elected members of the Poway Unified School District Board of Trustees in California who used their personal Facebook and Twitter accounts to communicate with the public.

Respondents Christopher Garnier and Kimberly Garnier, parents of local students, “spammed Petitioners’ posts and tweets with repetitive comments and replies” so the school board members blocked the respondents from the accounts, according to the petition filed by Ms. O’Connor-Ratcliff and Mr. Zane.

But the Garniers said they were acting in good faith.

“The Garniers left comments exposing financial mismanagement by the former superintendent as well as incidents of racism,” the couple said in a brief.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit found in favor of the Garniers, holding that elected officials using social media accounts were participating in a public forum.

The Supreme Court ruled in a three-page opinion that because the 9th Circuit deviated from the standard the high court articulated in Lindke v. Freed, the 9th Circuit’s decision must be vacated.

The case was remanded to the 9th Circuit “for further proceedings consistent with our opinion” in the Lindke case, the Supreme Court stated.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/17/2024 - 22:10

Read More

Continue Reading


Home buyers must now navigate higher mortgage rates and prices

Rates under 4% came and went during the Covid pandemic, but home prices soared. Here’s what buyers and sellers face as the housing season ramps up.



Springtime is spreading across the country. You can see it as daffodil, camellia, tulip and other blossoms start to emerge. 

You can also see it in the increasing number of for sale signs popping up in front of homes, along with the painting, gardening and general sprucing up as buyers get ready to sell. 

Which leads to two questions: 

  • How is the real estate market this spring? 
  • Where are mortgage rates? 

What buyers and sellers face

The housing market is bedeviled with supply shortages, high prices and slow sales.

Mortgage rates are still high and may limit what a buyer can offer and a seller can expect.  

Related: Analyst warns that a TikTok ban could lead to major trouble for Apple, Big Tech

And there's a factor not expected that may affect the sales process. Fixed commission rates on home sales are going away in July.

Reports this week and in a week will make the situation clearer for buyers and sellers. 

The reports are:

  • Housing starts from the U.S. Commerce Department due Tuesday. The consensus estimate is for a seasonally adjusted rate of about 1.4 million homes. These would include apartments, both rentals and condominiums. 
  • Existing home sales, due Thursday from the National Association of Realtors. The consensus estimate is for a seasonally adjusted sales rate of about 4 million homes. In 2023, some 4.1 million homes were sold, the worst sales rate since 1995. 
  • New-home sales and prices, due Monday from the Commerce Department. Analysts are expecting a sales rate of 661,000 homes (including condos), up 1.5% from a year ago.

Here is what buyers and sellers need to know about the situation. 

Mortgage rates will stay above 5% 

That's what most analysts believe. Right now, the rate on a 30-year mortgage is between 6.7% and 7%. 

Rates peaked at 8% in October after the Federal Reserve signaled it was done raising interest rates.

The Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey of March 14 was at 6.74%. 

Freddie Mac buys mortgages from lenders and sells securities to investors. The effect is to replenish lenders' cash levels to make more loans. 

A hotter-than-expected Producer Price Index released that day has pushed quotes to 7% or higher, according to data from Mortgage News Daily, which tracks mortgage markets.

Home buyers must navigate higher mortgage rates and prices this spring.


On a median-priced home (price: $380,000) and a 20% down payment, that means a principal and interest rate payment of $2,022. The payment  does not include taxes and insurance.

Last fall when the 30-year rate hit 8%, the payment would have been $2,230. 

In 2021, the average rate was 2.96%, which translated into a payment of $1,275. 

Short of a depression, that's a rate that won't happen in most of our lifetimes. 

Most economists believe current rates will fall to around 6.3% by the end of the year, maybe lower, depending on how many times the Federal Reserve cuts rates this year. 

If 6%, the payment on our median-priced home is $1,823.

But under 5%, absent a nasty recession, fuhgettaboutit.

Supply will be tight, keeping prices up

Two factors are affecting the supply of homes for sale in just about every market.

First: Homeowners who had been able to land a mortgage at 2.96% are very reluctant to sell because they would then have to find a home they could afford with, probably, a higher-cost mortgage.

More economic news:

Second, the combination of high prices and high mortgage rates are freezing out thousands of potential buyers, especially those looking for homes in lower price ranges.

Indeed, The Wall Street Journal noted that online brokerage Redfin said only about 20% of homes for sale in February were affordable for the typical household.

And here mortgage rates can play one last nasty trick. If rates fall, that means a buyer can afford to pay more. Sellers and their real-estate agents know this too, and may ask for a higher price. 

Covid's last laugh: An inflation surge

Mortgage rates jumped to 8% or higher because since 2022 the Federal Reserve has been fighting to knock inflation down to 2% a year. Raising interest rates was the ammunition to battle rising prices.

In June 2022, the consumer price index was 9.1% higher than a year earlier. 

The causes of the worst inflation since the 1970s were: 

  • Covid-19 pandemic, which caused the global economy to shut down in 2020. When Covid ebbed and people got back to living their lives, getting global supply chains back to normal operation proved difficult. 
  • Oil prices jumped to record levels because of the recovery from the pandemic recovery and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

What the changes in commissions means

The long-standing practice of paying real-estate agents will be retired this summer, after the National Association of Realtors settled a long and bitter legal fight.

No longer will the seller necessarily pay 6% of the sale price to split between buyer and seller agents.

Both sellers and buyers will have to negotiate separately the services agents have charged for 100 years or more. These include pre-screening properties, writing sales contracts, and the like. The change will continue a trend of adding costs and complications to the process of buying or selling a home.

Already, interest rates are a complication. In addition, homeowners insurance has become very pricey, especially in communities vulnerable to hurricanes, tornadoes, and forest fires. Florida homeowners have seen premiums jump more than 102% in the last three years. A policy now costs three times more than the national average.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024


Read More

Continue Reading


Mistakes Were Made

Mistakes Were Made

Authored by C.J.Hopkins via The Consent Factory,

Make fun of the Germans all you want, and I’ve certainly done that…



Mistakes Were Made

Authored by C.J.Hopkins via The Consent Factory,

Make fun of the Germans all you want, and I’ve certainly done that a bit during these past few years, but, if there’s one thing they’re exceptionally good at, it’s taking responsibility for their mistakes. Seriously, when it comes to acknowledging one’s mistakes, and not rationalizing, or minimizing, or attempting to deny them, and any discomfort they may have allegedly caused, no one does it quite like the Germans.

Take this Covid mess, for example. Just last week, the German authorities confessed that they made a few minor mistakes during their management of the “Covid pandemic.” According to Karl Lauterbach, the Minister of Health, “we were sometimes too strict with the children and probably started easing the restrictions a little too late.” Horst Seehofer, the former Interior Minister, admitted that he would no longer agree to some of the Covid restrictions today, for example, nationwide nighttime curfews. “One must be very careful with calls for compulsory vaccination,” he added. Helge Braun, Head of the Chancellery and Minister for Special Affairs under Merkel, agreed that there had been “misjudgments,” for example, “overestimating the effectiveness of the vaccines.”

This display of the German authorities’ unwavering commitment to transparency and honesty, and the principle of personal honor that guides the German authorities in all their affairs, and that is deeply ingrained in the German character, was published in a piece called “The Divisive Virus” in Der Spiegel, and immediately widely disseminated by the rest of the German state and corporate media in a totally organic manner which did not in any way resemble one enormous Goebbelsian keyboard instrument pumping out official propaganda in perfect synchronization, or anything creepy and fascistic like that.

Germany, after all, is “an extremely democratic state,” with freedom of speech and the press and all that, not some kind of totalitarian country where the masses are inundated with official propaganda and critics of the government are dragged into criminal court and prosecuted on trumped-up “hate crime” charges.

OK, sure, in a non-democratic totalitarian system, such public “admissions of mistakes” — and the synchronized dissemination thereof by the media — would just be a part of the process of whitewashing the authorities’ fascistic behavior during some particularly totalitarian phase of transforming society into whatever totalitarian dystopia they were trying to transform it into (for example, a three-year-long “state of emergency,” which they declared to keep the masses terrorized and cooperative while they stripped them of their democratic rights, i.e., the ones they hadn’t already stripped them of, and conditioned them to mindlessly follow orders, and robotically repeat nonsensical official slogans, and vent their impotent hatred and fear at the new “Untermenschen” or “counter-revolutionaries”), but that is obviously not the case here.

No, this is definitely not the German authorities staging a public “accountability” spectacle in order to memory-hole what happened during 2020-2023 and enshrine the official narrative in history. There’s going to be a formal “Inquiry Commission” — conducted by the same German authorities that managed the “crisis” — which will get to the bottom of all the regrettable but completely understandable “mistakes” that were made in the heat of the heroic battle against The Divisive Virus!

OK, calm down, all you “conspiracy theorists,” “Covid deniers,” and “anti-vaxxers.” This isn’t going to be like the Nuremberg Trials. No one is going to get taken out and hanged. It’s about identifying and acknowledging mistakes, and learning from them, so that the authorities can manage everything better during the next “pandemic,” or “climate emergency,” or “terrorist attack,” or “insurrection,” or whatever.

For example, the Inquiry Commission will want to look into how the government accidentally declared a Nationwide State of Pandemic Emergency and revised the Infection Protection Act, suspending the German constitution and granting the government the power to rule by decree, on account of a respiratory virus that clearly posed no threat to society at large, and then unleashed police goon squads on the thousands of people who gathered outside the Reichstag to protest the revocation of their constitutional rights.

Once they do, I’m sure they’ll find that that “mistake” bears absolutely no resemblance to the Enabling Act of 1933, which suspended the German constitution and granted the government the power to rule by decree, after the Nazis declared a nationwide “state of emergency.”

Another thing the Commission will probably want to look into is how the German authorities accidentally banned any further demonstrations against their arbitrary decrees, and ordered the police to brutalize anyone participating in such “illegal demonstrations.”

And, while the Commission is inquiring into the possibly slightly inappropriate behavior of their law enforcement officials, they might want to also take a look at the behavior of their unofficial goon squads, like Antifa, which they accidentally encouraged to attack the “anti-vaxxers,” the “Covid deniers,” and anyone brandishing a copy of the German constitution.

Come to think of it, the Inquiry Commission might also want to look into how the German authorities, and the overwhelming majority of the state and corporate media, accidentally systematically fomented mass hatred of anyone who dared to question the government’s arbitrary and nonsensical decrees or who refused to submit to “vaccination,” and publicly demonized us as “Corona deniers,” “conspiracy theorists,” “anti-vaxxers,” “far-right anti-Semites,” etc., to the point where mainstream German celebrities like Sarah Bosetti were literally describing us as the inessential “appendix” in the body of the nation, quoting an infamous Nazi almost verbatim.

And then there’s the whole “vaccination” business. The Commission will certainly want to inquire into that. They will probably want to start their inquiry with Karl Lauterbach, and determine exactly how he accidentally lied to the public, over and over, and over again …

And whipped people up into a mass hysteria over “KILLER VARIANTS” …



And so on. I could go on with this all day, but it will be much easier to just refer you, and the Commission, to this documentary film by Aya Velázquez. Non-German readers may want to skip to the second half, unless they’re interested in the German “Corona Expert Council” …

Look, the point is, everybody makes “mistakes,” especially during a “state of emergency,” or a war, or some other type of global “crisis.” At least we can always count on the Germans to step up and take responsibility for theirs, and not claim that they didn’t know what was happening, or that they were “just following orders,” or that “the science changed.”

Plus, all this Covid stuff is ancient history, and, as Olaf, an editor at Der Spiegel, reminds us, it’s time to put the “The Divisive Pandemic” behind us …

… and click heels, and heil the New Normal Democracy!

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/16/2024 - 23:20

Read More

Continue Reading