Pages

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Briefly Noted: Zhou Mano A Mano With Vlad--What Could Go Wrong?

You'll recall that the Hillary retreads in charge of the Zhou regime's "foreign policy" got baked and eaten alive in Alaska by their PRC counterparts. Apparently having learned nothing from that escapade, the regime is now sending Zhou himself to go mano a mano with Vlad Putin in Geneva. Zhou's handlers have told him to say that, after some highly suspicious maneuvering regarding the Nordstream 2 deal, Zhou is ready to get tough on human rights--whatever that really means. As reported by The Guardian:


In a speech marking the Memorial Day holiday, Baiden said: "I’m meeting with President Putin in a couple weeks in Geneva, making it clear we will not stand by and let him abuse those rights."

He also said that the moment was right to show the world, and namely China, that the US was ready to lead again after four years of a largely inward-looking foreign policy under Donald Trump.

"It’s time to remind everybody who we are," he said.


That could be problematic. Following revelations regarding the Nordstream 2 deal and the coverup of US involvement in the Wuhan lab screwup--and ensuing deaths of millions internationally--most of the world may believe they already know exactly "who we are." They are undoubtedly more aware of who Zhou and his bagman Hunter are and have been for many years than are many in the US.

Most certainly Putin and his world class foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov (as opposed to US amateurs), have little doubt regarding the nature of the Zhou regime. Barrons reports via AFP: Putin Ready To Discuss Rights In Russia, US.


President Vladimir Putin is ready to discuss a range of rights issues with his US counterpart Zhou Baiden when they meet next month, including the "persecution" of those behind the US Capitol [protest], Moscow said Monday.

Baiden on Sunday pledged to press the Kremlin chief to uphold human rights when they meet in Geneva in mid-June for their first summit.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters on Monday that Moscow would not shy away from discussing any issue at the summit and Putin could raise the January 6 protests in support of Baiden's predecessor Donald Trump.

"Of course, we will be ready to discuss everything, including problems that exist in the United States," Lavrov told reporters. He said Russia was monitoring the "persecution" of those behind the January 6 [protest] at the US Capitol.

"A lot of interesting things are happening there," he said, adding that Russia wanted to discuss "protection of opposition rights" in the United States.


Russia has some strong talking points in this regard. Consider that disgraced former AG Bluto Barr and his FBI Director stood by doing little to nothing (beyond denying that Antifa exists) while the Establishment/Deep State proxy thugs roamed the streets perpetrating violent attacks for months before Election 2020. Now peaceful opponents of the coup are being persecuted by the Deep State FBI, with many being held in durance vile while trumped (!) up charges are manufactured--in the face of all evidence to the contrary. The US has an election fairness rating on a par with third world countries such as Mexico, according to international election watchdog groups, yet the Establishment is opposing all efforts to audit suspect elections.

If Putin and Lavrov get any media coverage at all, this could turn into a major PR disaster for the already reeling Zhou regime.


Monday, May 31, 2021

We Made A Big Mistake

There's a huge breaking story out tonight regarding vax safety.

You may--I hope--recall the name Dr. Byram Bridle. Bridle, a viral immunologist at the University of Guelph in Canada, featured in a very lengthy post from mid April (which still makes interesting reading): Vax Hesitancy--Reasonable Or Not? 

On May 29th Bridle gave a blockbuster interview, just eight minutes long, on Canadian radio, and that interview could be a game changer.

What Bridle and some colleagues did was to file the equivalent of a FOIA request with a Japanese regulatory agency that had done a "bio-distribution" study on the mRNA vaccines, i.e., Pfizer and Moderna. What a bio-distribution study tells you is where the vaccine travels in the body. That study, which Bridle had translated, was an eye opener.


‘Terrifying’ new research finds vaccine spike protein unexpectedly in bloodstream. The protein is linked to blood clots, heart and brain damage, and potential risks to nursing babies and fertility.


What I'll do is present some introductory material from the article, but then I'll provide what amounts to a full transcript of Bridle's radio interview. The interview is actually basically a monologue by Bridle, and it's well organized. Following the transcript will be a Youtube of the interview (audio only).

Before any of that, I want to point out that in the interview Bridle talks only about mRNA vaccines--Pfizer and Moderna. Many may be under the impression that side effects are a feature only of J&J and AstraZeneca. That is definitely not the case. In this regard (and others) Bridle is in complete agreement with Sucharit Bhakdi. In fact, the findings that Bridle relates in the interview confirm exactly what we presented Bhakdi stating in Blood Clots And Beyond.

So, with that we turn to the LifeSite article and offer these brief excerpts that will lead into the interview transcript. The entire article is worth checking out:

Herd Immunity?

The other day the NYT featured a major article on gun sales in America: 


An Arms Race in America: Gun Buying Spiked During the Pandemic. It’s Still Up.


I won't go into the details. If you're interested you can follow the link. Or, you can read Steve Sailer's post on the article, which features extensive excerpts as well as Sailer's comments. The title of Sailer's post tells enough of the story to eliminate much of the guesswork from figuring out what's going on: Gun Sales Up 64%.

However, Don Surber has an interesting take on this today, and finishes his brief comments with a pointed question:


ITEM 2: More good Second Amendment news.

The New York Times complained, "An Arms Race in America: Gun Buying Spiked During the Pandemic. It’s Still Up.

"Preliminary research data show that about a fifth of all Americans who bought guns last year were first-time gun owners. Sales usually spike around elections, but the sheer volume is notable."


What's notable about that? What's notable is the sheer number of Americans who for the first time ever in their lives felt threatened enough to go through the government mandated hassles and purchase a firearm.

Here's what the article says about that. Of course it's slanted in some respects, but reflect on it:

UPDATED: More Evidence Of Demographic Woes In China

About a week ago we ran a post based on research by SinoInsider. That study pointed to evidence that China has been fiddling with its latest census numbers to conceal very bad demographic news. The numbers presented, according to this study, may have been intended to clumsily conceal the extent of the Covid disaster in China:  Is China Jiggering It's Census Numbers? And Why? At the same time, as we've emphasized in the past, the article affirmed that China has for decades been caught in a classic demographic trap. Despite its economic and technological progress, China is growing old before it grows rich, leaving an enormous portion of its population without provision for their old age. Meanwhile the numbers of the working age population continue to drastically shrink. Even worse, the birth rate among the working young also continues to fall, despite belated efforts to increase the number of births. That guarantees that the imbalance will only grow much worse in the future.

Today Fox News carries a story that, most likely, few will notice. Nevertheless, it's an important story as an indicator of how aware the PRC is of the scope of its demographic problem and of the dangers involved for China's future:

Sunday, May 30, 2021

White Coat Supremacist

That's what Lloyd Billingsley calls Tony Fauci. I've harped on Fauci's lack of credible credentials for the position he holds. Below are links to three articles that amount to quite the expose of Fauci. The offered excerpts are brief, as compared to the full articles, so if you're interested ...


White Coat Supremacist Anthony Fauci Still Wears Yellow Beret

In 1968, newly minted doctor joined NIH to dodge medical service with the U.S. military.

Secret Probation? Wow--Thanks For Your Service!

After all, secret probation beats going to jail, right?


Retired FBI agent charged in “secret probation” scheme


DALLAS (1080 KRLD) - A retired FBI agent is indicted for allegedly scamming a woman out of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Justice Department says William Roy Stone Jr., 62, convinced a Granbury woman in 2015 that she was on “secret probation” for drug crimes in “Judge Anderson’s Court” in Austin.

...

Stone gave the woman a series of conditions, including reimbursing him for expenses incurred; and that if she didn’t comply, she risked imprisonment and the loss of her children.

Stone ultimately convinced her to pay him about $800,000, which he used to buy cars and a house.

...

Stone was indicted earlier this week on a slew of charges, including wire fraud and false impersonation of a federal officer, and made his initial court appearance Friday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford.

If convicted, Stone faces up to 178 years in federal prison.


My bet--he won't get probation. Secret or otherwise.


Vidkun Quisling: Stop Calling Me A Barr!

Ha! I wish I could take credit for that, but I ripped off Don Surber. Hey, no shame in that, right? (For the younger generation: Quisling)

Anyway, H/T to my Dutch friend. This is self explanatory:



Now, in fairness, what's actually said in the short video clip is that Bluto told Tony to turn everything over to the FBI. At least that's Shaffer's version. Implicit in that, of course, is the idea that, Hey, Tony my friend, back off and let the Bureau handle this! We'll handle this! 

As a follow on to the Covid post from yesterday, In Case You Had Any Doubts, do yourself a favor and read this Zerohedge piece that Ray SoCal linked in a comment. It works from a long article by another Nick Wade type guy--IOW, another former NYT guy (Michael Capuzzo) who's late to the game but does a good job documenting what's happened and is still going on--this time re the US Government's attempt to suppress Ivermectin--a drug that won its inventor the Nobel Prize and is one of the safest most widely effective drugs in the world:


"I Don't Know Of A Bigger Story In The World" Right Now Than Ivermectin: NYTimes Best-Selling Author


The hope is that, with the imprimatur of an honest to God MSM journalist, this story will now get the attention it deserves and will make others feel empowered to dig deeper.

Saturday, May 29, 2021

Fascism

 

Fascism is a religion of the state. It assumes the organic unity of the body politic and longs for a national leader attuned to the will of the people. It is totalitarian in that it views everything as political and holds that any action by the state is justified to achieve the common good. It takes responsibility for all aspects of life, including our health and well-being, and seeks to impose uniformity of thought and action, whether by force or through regulation and social pressure. Everything, including the economy and religion, must be aligned with its objectives. Any rival identity is part of the ‘problem’ and therefore defined as the enemy. I will argue that contemporary American liberalism embodies all of these aspects of fascism.


I hope that definition of Fascism strikes a chord with readers. It represents the ideal of essentially all modern states. In terms of Meaning in History, what Fascism represents is the powerful urge of post Christian man to return to the compact unity--the "organic unity"--of "archaic" pre Christian cultures. Those cultures, and the states in which they were embodied, existed as compact, organic unities in which everything that we consider somehow separate were regarded as inseparable. Religion, politics, cultural expressions--it was all part of the organic expression of "archaic" man's self understanding as existing in a divinely instituted cultural unity. 

Dissent from any aspect of that unity was understood as rebellion against the whole. Thus, Socrates expression of free thinking and questioning required that he be executed. So, too, the Christian refusal to sacrifice to the official Roman gods was an act of rebellion against all things Roman--state, politics, religion.

The Christian insistence that God--understood as creator of all that exists and the sole father of all men--is knowable to human reason without societal, state, or cultural intermediation destroyed that compact unity. Within that compact unity man had felt at home. Christian faith--reasoned belief in the infinite creator God, as expressed by Paul in Romans 2--was a demanding way of life. In return for a reasoned understanding of man in the world under God, it demanded serious commitment and reasoned endeavor.

The final breakdown of Christendom faith as a unifying force for Western society in the late Middle Ages, leading to the religious wars of early modernity, led to post Christian man seeking an alternative. There really was only one alternative--an attempted return to the "archaic" vision of man in the universe. However, Christian faith made a return to the now naive worldview of paganism impossible for the modern nation states--although we see the attractive power of neo-paganism in our own culture. Instead, modern man was forced to formulate an alternate, competing ideology to Christianity--an ideology in the sense of being no longer based on a reasoned interaction with reality but an attempt to impose a man made reality on the world.

In Case You Had Any Doubts

I hope you don't have any doubts that Covid is a bio-engineered coronavirus, a joint project of the Chinese and US governments. Now, both of those governments are humongous bureaucracies, so obviously the components that were responsible could be narrowed down to a relatively few institutions within those governments. In fact, the responsible parties could be narrowed down to relatively few individuals--starting with Tony Fauci, since he provided the funding, and nothing of this sort happens without funding. It's fine to blame the Chinese, but let's be real--the US is very much to blame as well. Moreover, the coverup of Covid origins--which continues to this day, despite recent revelations--has also been a joint project. A lot of big money interests in the US are implicated.

As Karl Denninger notes today (So You Knew, You Cheated, And It Killed Millions):


Don't give me any of this bull**** about how we -- we being people in our government including the CDC, NIH and others -- didn't know either.  We did know.  In late November and early December.  There were reports of the lab being shut down and cell service interrupted along with deaths from atypical pneumonia.  Our government knew.  What's to determine now is exactly who knew both inside and outside the US, when did they know and what did they intentionally block or divert attention from that can plausibly be tied to the deaths that occurred.
The relatives and loved ones of those who died as a result of this stupidity are likely to want blood and if they do they should get it. This is a mass-slaughter comparable in impact to a genocide and should be treated accordingly up and down the line.


Read that last sentence again. Does that give you some idea of why the US is resolutely covering up Covid origins--still? Yes, this is about China but, No, it's not just about China.

By the way, Denninger points out something interesting that I hadn't been previously aware of:

Bull Who?

A strong indicator emerges that the Bull Durham "investigation" into the Russia Hoax really was just Bull Sh*t. The Washington Times looked into the DoJ expenditures report for the fake investigation (released Friday), and came up with this:


Durham reportedly spent just $1.5m during first six months of Trump-Russia FBI probe

Figure is allegedly less than 25% of what Robert Mueller spent during similar timeframe.


Obviously Bluto Barr, disgraced former AG, understood what was going on--essentially nothing. He's not stupid. He knew then, he knows now. And yet has the effrontery to appear in public and comment on the state of the republic.

Per the Washington Times:

Extremism Is In The Eyes Of The Beholder

H/T/ Jim

So the big question becomes, who's doing the beholding in the military? Because the Pentagon is looking to come up with new regulations to prosecute "extremism" in the military. What extremism are they beholding?


The Pentagon wants a new ‘reg’ for prosecuting extremism


Any country that has a large professional military and a huge intelligence and government legal establishment that cooperates in an Interagency community need to take great care to prevent those institutions from taking on lives of their own to further interests of their own--which may run counter to the interests of the society and culture within which they exist. Movements within the ruling establishment that seek to transform the surrounding culture and political structures as embodied in founding documents in ways that are resisted by major portions of the populace become extremely concerning when they are joined by organized groupings within the military. To such an extent, "extremism" so defined is a very real concern. 

But, again, the question is: who's beholding "extremism"? What extremist grouping is seeking to enlist the military to the cause of transformation or, alternatively, what extremist grouping is seeking to neuter the military to prevent it from resisting transformation?

With that background consideration, the Military Times reports:


The Defense Department has been rolling out initiatives to address the threat of domestic extremism serving in uniform since early this year, and now its next budget request hopes to throw some money behind them.

The proposal released Friday includes $30.8 million to enhance technology and manpower for training, screening and policy updates, including a big one: “the development of a punitive regulation on extremist activities.”

...

While commands can currently charge service members for espousing extremist views, or participating in extremist plots, through misconduct regulations in both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and a current DoD instruction covering extremist activities, this year’s renewed discussion about extremism has included calls for new, concrete guidelines and tools for commanders to hold troops accountable. Those millions in funding will also go to improving “vetting protocols and screening of public available electronic information (aka social media) and develop and deploy an Enterprise Case Management tracking tool for tracking activities of concern.”

A Pentagon spokesman recently refuted a report that the department was pursuing a contract with a private firm to troll social media for questionable service member activity on a mass scale, clarifying that social media is already part of existing screening and background check protocols.

Another $9.1 million will go to combating extremism and insider threats, according to budget documents, in the spirit of the findings of a report done after an attack at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida, by a Saudi Arabian pilot trainee. That will include “enhanced federal capabilities in reporting; tracking extremism activities; and improved DoD accession processes.”

Many of these initiatives fall under an extremism working group that first met in April. So far, the group has been tasks with facilitating a study to take a look at the prevalence of extreme ideologies in the services, as well as to develop an official department definition of extremism, and to update training for transitioning troops, who are often targeted by domestic extremist groups.


It seems worth noting that this concern for "extremism" in the ranks is being driven by the same societal groupings that have propagated such conspiracy theories as that the January 6 Event constituted an armed White Supremacist insurrection--contrary to videotaped evidence--or that concerns for the integrity of elections is also part of a White Supremacist plot.

My own view remains that the current anti-extremist crusade will have an extremely detrimental effect on discipline within the military and, therefore, on morale, training, and preparedness. In particular, the military will likely result in extreme difficulty in re-enlisting qualified and high value personnel. My reasoning is based on the view that those demographics most inclined to pursue a professional military career will be least inclined to tolerate living within the anti-extremist narrative we are being subjected to currently. Conversely, those demographics most inclined to accept that narrative will be least inclined to pursue a professional military career.

Trouble ahead. It's time that the GOP and conservatives generally took note, before the military--with its politicized leadership--faces a major crisis.


Friday, May 28, 2021

Quick Fauci Update

My wife is recuperating nicely, and I'm ready to get out of my Devil's Advocate role regarding the Roberts Strategy. So ...

A quick Fauci update.

The latest story making the rounds concerns Fauci's 2012 advocacy for gain of function research on viral diseases. In the writings that have been unearthed he avoids that term, but it's clear that that's what he's talking about. He also disguises the scope of the research he was advocating for. For example, in a Washington Post article--A flu virus risk worth taking--he claims the big concern is new influenza pandemic, whereas in fact coronaviruses were very much part of the program. The significance of that is this. It's known that flu viruses do move from animal species to humans. However, to my knowledge that doesn't appear to be the case with coronaviruses--except for SARS Classic and Covid-19, both of which are now suspected to have been engineered in Chinese labs that also do bioweapon research.

Fauci's claim is that the risk of a natural pandemic is far greater than the risk arising from experimentation gone awry:



Note, however, that Fauci doesn't attempt to quantify the relative risks--he just tosses that speculative statement out there.

In the WaPo article, too, a careful reading between the lines shows that Fauci is engaged in scientific puffery--he paints an alarming picture of the risk of "unprecedented" death tolls from a new naturally occurring pandemic, while slyly admitting that no one has any inkling when, if ever, that might occur: