Jts5665

In three previous articles, I explored the puzzles of Dr. Deborah Birx’s appointment to the White House Coronavirus Response Task Force, her dubious scientific claims, and the people and groups she may or may not have worked with. In order to make sense of all the inconsistencies and incongruities that emerged, I hypothesized that Birx probably had ties to a group of military/intelligence/biosecurity actors who wanted to cover up a lab leak of an engineered virus – a group I am calling “the lab-leak cabal.”

It is my (as yet unproven) theory that the lab-leak cabal, for which Birx was a primary agent in the US government, wanted to impose strict lockdowns all over the world. Why they wanted lockdowns may include any or all of the following:

1. The cabal, in tandem with Chinese authorities, wanted to divert attention from their culpability in creating a deadly and highly infectious virus that escaped into the world’s population.

2. Population exposure to an enhanced pandemic potential pathogen was unprecedented, so they felt it had to be countered with unprecedented containment measures, on an unprecedented scale.

3. China said their lockdowns were working to stop the virus, and the cabal really wanted to believe China that lockdowns could work if they were strict and long enough.

4. They saw the pandemic as an opportunity to test their ideas and experiment with tactics for global crisis management, including lockdowns, rapid vaccine manufacture and distribution, real-time surveillance of individuals and entire populations, media manipulation and other novel solutions waiting for a catastrophic problem.

Whatever their motives, the goal seems very clear: Get as many countries as possible to lock down for as long as possible, at least until vaccines became available.

But locking down entire countries full of healthy populations was never an accepted or ethically/medically/scientifically supported pandemic response, and people might object to such draconian measures. So Birx+cabal had to create enough panic to make it happen. 

What, then, was their strategy? 

An outsider unknowingly provides the lockdown blueprint

In his scathing account of his time on the Task Force, A Plague Upon Our House, Dr. Scott Atlas – the only outsider I’m aware of who managed to penetrate the Task Force’s inner workings – uses phrases like “Kafkaesque absurdity,” “incomprehensible error,” and “frankly immoral” to describe what he witnessed. Indeed, if the Task Force had actually been trying to apply best practices to pandemic mitigation, then everything they did would seem incomprehensibly misguided and obviously terrible – as it did to Atlas. 

However, if you believe (as I do) that Birx was imposing the lab-leak cabal’s agenda on the Task Force and the country (and, by extension, the world), then everything they did suddenly makes perfect sense: All the policies that seemed ridiculous when examined separately worked splendidly together to whip up massive panic, which in turn induced global compliance with draconian lockdowns.

In other words, each anti-scientific, non-public-health measure in itself – e.g., universal cloth masking, testing and quarantining after the virus was widespread, focusing on cases instead of hospitalizations or deaths – was not intended to achieve anything, except the singular goal of fomenting massive fear. And the purpose of the fear was to ensure maximum compliance with lockdowns.

Which brings us back to Scott Atlas, who inadvertently, in decrying the Task Force’s terrible policies and behaviors, managed to reveal the outline of their hidden agenda. 

Based on Atlas’s astute observations of Birx and Co.’s worst practices, I have compiled a ten-step list of instructions for how to get the world to comply with totalitarian lockdown policies in response to a not-very-devastating pandemic.

[ALL QUOTES ARE FROM ATLAS’S BOOK, KINDLE VERSION]

1. Whip up as much fear as possible. If you want entire populations to agree to prolonged draconian lockdowns that have never been used or tested before, then people have to be really, really, really scared.

[ATLAS REPORTING A CONVERSATION WITH DR. ANTHONY FAUCI]

“I challenged him to clarify his point, because I couldn’t believe my ears. ‘So you think people aren’t frightened enough?’ He said, ‘Yes, they need to be more afraid.’ To me, this was another moment of Kafkaesque absurdity. I replied, ‘I totally disagree. People are paralyzed with fear. Fear is one of the main problems at this point.’ Inside, I was also shocked at his thought process, as such an influential face of the pandemic. Instilling fear in the public is absolutely counter to what a leader in public health should do. To me, it is frankly immoral.” (p. 186)

“All internal meetings involving Birx were filled with warnings and exhortations advocating locking society down, although never using those words.” (p. 131)

2. Insist that the virus is unlike any other. The unknown is always scarier than what we know. Plus, if we cannot apply anything we know about any other viruses, then we can justify any untested, unprecedented response we choose.

“Perhaps the most fundamental error that went unchallenged was the World Health Organization’s initial characterization of this virus as entirely new. Even its name—novel coronavirus—implied that we knew nothing about it in terms of its causes, effects, and management protocols. That ‘novelty’ also implied that no one would have any immune-system protection from it.” (p. 32)

“That mischaracterization helped incite panic and was fundamental to prompting the ensuing draconian lockdowns.” (pp. 32-33)

2a) Insist that natural immunity does not apply. If this virus is unlike any other, then maybe exposure to it does not confer immunity as exposure to every other virus does.

“Today, as the world still struggles with the biological truth of the importance of natural immunity as part of herd immunity, I contemplate why it was viewed as some sort of diabolical term. But it’s clear to see why it was employed by those clinging to lockdowns at all costs. Casting herd immunity as reckless and dangerous was unethical, but ultimately even more effective than simple character assassination for a political purpose. Of all the cynical ways to manipulate people, fear was their best way to maintain lockdowns, despite the massive destruction from lockdowns that regular people saw before their own eyes.” (p. 374)

3. Emphasize how little we know and how uncertain we are about the virus. Neither past experiences nor real-time data can allay fears, because we know nothing about this virus and will continue to know nothing until we somehow manage to crush it.

“There was no articulation of what we knew, what the scientific studies and the world’s evidence had shown. On the contrary, Fauci repeatedly emphasized in his occasional Task Force comments, as he did in his frequent media interviews, what we did not know with certainty, just as a layman without any medical perspective would do. For instance, the issue of risk to children, or spread from children to adults, was always, ‘Well, we don’t know for sure,’ despite repeated studies from all over the world elucidating that we did know. 

That pattern of highlighting uncertainties while minimizing decades of fundamental immunology and virology was alarmist and contrary to the expected behavior of a public health leader. It created massive fear inside and outside the White House, and it drove on-the-ground lockdowns and mandates.” (pp. 167-168)

3a) Use only worst-case scenario models to determine policy. No real-world data can ever apply to a novel virus about which we know nothing, and worst-case scenarios are usefully terrifying.

“Suddenly, computer modelers and people without any perspective about clinical illnesses were dominating the airwaves. Along with millions of Americans, I began witnessing unprecedented responses from those in power and nonscientific recommendations by public health spokespeople… These recommendations were not just based on panic; they were responsible for generating even more panic.” (p. 25)

“Regardless of the obvious and continual failures of statistical models, the prominent display of those same models in the media continued…The discussion about models represents one of the early displays of groupthink in this pandemic. The repetition of misinformation from many voices became accepted as truth. Media outlets and prominent policymakers clung to those same failed models, and they kept inciting panic.” (p. 319)

4. Ignore all previous medical, scientific and public health knowledge and guidelines.

“The more I studied the data and the literature, the more obvious it became that basic biology and simple logic were missing from the discussion. Instead, fear had seemingly displaced critical thinking about the data already at hand. No one seemed to remember many fundamentals of science taught in college and medical school.” (p. 26)

4a) Impose medically and scientifically bunk mandates that serve only to signal a never-ending state of emergency.

“Masks were already proven to be ineffective for influenza, a virus of similar size. That had been reviewed by the CDC in May 2020 and by Oxford University’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine in July 2020. The empirical evidence from the US and all over the world already had shown masks failed to stop COVID-19 cases from surging.” (pp. 331-2)

“Relying on masks would be dangerous, implying protection for those at risk to die, like the vulnerable elderly, when legitimate protection was not conferred. Requiring masks would also increase the fear, as a visible public reminder of the ‘extreme danger.’” (p. 332)

5. Do not consult anyone who applies traditional pandemic response standards, including world experts who conduct scientific, medical and ethical/economic/social risk-benefit analyses.

“It was baffling to me, an incomprehensible error of whoever assembled the Task Force, that there were zero public health policy experts and no experts with medical knowledge who also analyzed economic, social, and other broad public health impacts other than the infection itself. Shockingly, the broad public health perspective was never part of the discussion among the Task Force health advisors other than when I brought it up. Even more bizarre was that no one seemed to notice.” (p. 107)

“In the end, the most egregious failure of the Task Force was its complete and utter disregard for the harmful impact of its recommended policies. This was outright immoral, an inexplicable betrayal of their most fundamental duty.” (p. 151)

6. Insist on testing everyone all the time regardless of symptoms and regardless of how much the virus has already spread. 

“Testing for this virus had turned into a national, indeed, international obsession.” (p. 103)

“This was diagnostic testing, with broad-reaching policy aims. In this pandemic, a positive test was a major driver of the policy of quarantining and isolating healthy people with low-risk profiles—shuttering businesses, closing schools—in short, a key to locking down the country.” (p. 107)

“Mass testing of low-risk people in low-risk environments was the inevitable pathway to lockdowns, and lockdowns were destructive.” (p. 116)

6a) Crank up the tests to diagnostically useless levels, so the numbers of seemingly positive cases are always sky-high.

“PCR tests were the basis of defining cases, and the basis for quarantines, but most were misleading. Using a PCR ‘cycle threshold’ of thirty-five—even lower than the thirty-seven to forty cycles used routinely to detect the virus—fewer than 3 percent of “positives” contain live, contagious virus, as reported by Clinical Infectious Diseases. Even the New York Times wrote in August that 90 percent or more of positive PCR tests falsely implied that someone was contagious. Sadly, during my entire time at the White House, this crucial fact would never even be addressed by anyone other than me…” (pp. 113-114)

7. Insist that the only relevant metric is case counts. The more cases you count, the worse the pandemic is, the more scared people are, the longer lockdowns continue.

“Their strange shift from flattening the curve to maintaining that we must stop all cases of COVID-19, at all costs, was firmly set in stone.” (p. 160)

“Of the first 11,000 ‘cases’ as defined by positive tests, zero were hospitalized. Soon over 25,000 cases—positive tests in mostly asymptomatic students—had been registered. Yet with all those ‘cases,’ zero hospitalizations—no illnesses requiring significant medical care. My view was that there was an alarming disconnect between the data on risk to college-age individuals and the policies being implemented.” (p. 204)

8. Insist that the virus is very dangerous for everyone. If you admit that certain demographic groups have a lower risk, people will not be scared enough.

“Even allowing for a non-expert level of knowledge, the Task Force doctors somehow ignored the evidence indicating the very low risk from this infection for the overwhelming majority of people. Birx even emphasized at the Task Force that this infection was extremely dangerous exactly because it was so commonly asymptomatic.” (p. 167)

“The medical science was consistent from the early days of the pandemic that even seasonal influenza is more dangerous to young children than this coronavirus. This perspective would have been enormously reassuring to parents, yet it was never put forth by those dominating the public narrative.” (p. 321)

9. Treat politicians and the general population as children requiring your guidance. Once they’re scared enough, you become the trustworthy authority figure who tells them what to do.

“It was my impression that most governors sincerely wanted assistance on designing their states’ response; instead, they were receiving basic admonitions and unscientific rules, as though they were children.” (p. 180)

10. Never admit your policies cause any harm. Insist to everyone (including yourself) that without them millions would have died.

“I never fully understood why there was no admission, even internally by the Task Force, that the Birx-Fauci strategy did not work.” (p. 237)

“To this day, I cannot understand why the human cost of the lockdowns never mattered to anyone else on the Task Force. It was never brought up while I was there, not a single doctor ever spoke of it. The media continues to ignore perhaps the most remarkable insight in the Fauci email trove discovered under FOIA in June 2021—the total lack of mention of harms from the lockdown throughout the pandemic.” (pp. 240-241)

CONCLUSION

Dr. Scott Atlas was appalled at what he considered gross errors and unethical behavior on the part of the White House Coronavirus Task Force doctors, led by Dr. Deborah Birx. He could not comprehend how medical professionals, like himself, could impose such disastrous policies. 

The questions Atlas raises are ones with which I, too, struggled for much of the pandemic:

• Why was the public not told about the steep age gradient of the virus?
• Why were parents not reassured that their children were at lower risk from this virus than from the flu?
• Why was natural immunity not just dismissed but suddenly considered an immoral “policy?”
• Why were we testing and quarantining long after it was clearly useless in terms of slowing the spread?
• Why were case counts, based on obviously bogus positive test results, considered a more important metric than hospitalizations and deaths?

I am deeply grateful to Atlas for his insights and inside reporting from the Task Force, because in raising these questions, he also inadvertently helped me come up with an answer: Everything Birx and the Task Force (and the lab-leak cabal I posit behind them) did was meant to foment fear, leading to compliance with unprecedented, untested, and predictably unsuccessful – not to mention enormously destructive – global lockdowns.

Atlas knew that fear was the tool they were using, but he could not understand how they could do so in good conscience. Nor can I.

“Using emotional distress as a tool to ensure greater adherence to government policy is immoral in public health, yet fear was consciously leveraged by those most influencing the citizenry.” (p. 348)

“Of all the cynical ways to manipulate people, fear was their best way to maintain lockdowns, despite the massive destruction from lockdowns that regular people saw before their own eyes.” (p.374)

Only through exposing the real motives behind this egregiously immoral behavior by global “public health” leaders that we can delegitimize their entire panic/lockdown enterprise, thereby hopefully lowering the chances of it happening again.

Vaccine zealotry has reached a fever pitch.

Last week, a day after the FDA authorized the new “Omicron booster” targeting the dominant Omicron BA.5 subvariant, the CDC’s vaccine committee formally recommended the shots for Americans as young as 12. Pfizer’s Omicron boosters will be available for people ages 12 and older, while Moderna’s new shots are for adults ages 18 and older. The new mRNA composition contains two half components of the spike protein: the ancestral virus strain and BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5, which have identical spikes.

The totality of public evidence for this new magical inoculation is detailed by CNBC:

For the BA.4/BA.5 boosters, the companies have submitted animal data. They have not released those data publicly, although at the June FDA meeting, Pfizer presented preliminary findings in eight mice given BA.4/BA.5 vaccines as their third dose. Compared with the mice that received the original vaccine as a booster, the animals showed an increased response to all Omicron variants tested: BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5.

Yes, on the basis of “increased response” to Omicron in eight mice, the Biden administration has ordered 171 million doses of the new Pfizer and Moderna boosters. Even had this vaccine been tested in humans and shown some efficacy against infection – like the primary series – there would be more than enough reason for caution and hesitation. The European Medicines Agency has warned against the potential adverse immunological effects of repeated boosting every four months. As Dr. Marty Makary from Johns Hopkins has noted, recent research shows a “reduced immune response against the Omicron strain among people previously infected who then received three Covid vaccine doses compared to a control group that previously had Covid and did not have multiple shots.”

It is just impossible to overstate the unconditional absurdity of the FDA and CDC decision. Not only is the booster merely available to the public (or most rationally, the greatest at-risk in nursing homes) but it is recommended by the state for everyone, including children and teenagers – those with least to gain and most to lose. The regulatory framework that allows them to approve and universally promote the booster is that of the Emergency Use Authorization:

The FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN [chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear] threat agents when certain criteria are met, including there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

What these serious “diseases or conditions” might be, which pose such a risk to a healthy 20-year-old that they warrant the use of these criminally under-tested inoculations, is nowhere mentioned. Moreover, rather than observing any kind of remotely defensible dosing schedule, the FDA has recommended the new booster as early as two months after the prior dose. Short vaccination intervals are known to elevate the risk of vaccine myocarditis – another towering and studiously ignored concern.

The most robust research for vaccine-induced myocarditis in young men, who are most at-risk for this adverse reaction, puts the probability at around 1 in 1,800 per second dose. As I’ve previously written, myocarditis is not “mild” and if left undetected, can easily be lethal (read about law enforcement member Dev’s near-death vaccine experience here).

What reassurance can CDC officials give to those concerned with the most documented serious adverse event associated with mRNA vaccination?

CDC official Dr. Sara Oliver: “We know that the myocarditis risk is unknown but anticipate a similar risk to that seen after the monovalent vaccines.”

Sigh.

Anyone who has followed the corruption of the FDA and CDC over the past two years could hardly find these developments surprising. Recall that 12 months ago, two top officials (Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause) at the FDA’s office of vaccine products resigned over political pressure from the White House to universally authorize the original booster shot to the public. Previously, the Trump administration pressured the FDA to “bend” vaccine emergency use authorization standards and allegedly prevented the collection of safety data prior to the 2020 election.

It’s more than rational to have subzero faith in institutions which are continually rotting on the inside and prone to outside influence from the most powerful political actors in the world. Those still working inside these banana-laboratories attest to their deterioration. On Bari Weiss’s Substack, Dr. Marty Makary and Dr. Tracy Beth Høeg reported stunning, privately obtained quotes from top FDA officials. Here’s a sampling:

“It's like a horror movie I'm being forced to watch and I can't close my eyes...people are getting bad advice and we can’t say anything.”

“I can’t tell you how many people at the FDA have told me, ‘I don't like any of this, but I just need to make it to my retirement.’”

For those who have previously complied with the authoritarian dictates of the government, this may be a great awakening. Do you trust a state-recommended medical intervention based on a 10th grade science experiment on eight mice (all of which got Omicron anyway)? Do you trust an agency which has been under tremendous political pressure, forcing their top vaccine experts to resign and other employees to witness an abject mockery of the scientific method? Do you trust a vaccine that hasn’t even been tested in humans, and will probably never be studied for effectiveness against infection or severe disease because “such trials are very expensive”?

Don’t take my word for it. Listen to Dr. Paul Offit, the most prominent vaccine expert in the U.S and member of the FDA's vaccine advisory committee (VRBPAC):

“I’m uncomfortable that we would move forward—that we would give millions or tens of millions of doses to people—based on mouse data.”

Rav Arora is a 21-year-old writer from Vancouver, British Columbia. His work has appeared in such places as the NY Post and The Globe and Mail. Yet his heretical writing on vaccine injuries and mandates has forced him to go independent. Please consider supporting him by becoming a paid subscriber at his Substack, Noble Truths.

The New York Times has published a fawning article about the fashion choices of Chinese Communist tyrants including President Xi Jinping, posting to its social media account in the early hours of Wednesday morning about how “cool” the “look” is. Article author Joy Dong – who The National Pulse understands is a former employee of the Chinese Communist state propaganda outfit Phoenix TV – begins her piece: “A dull blue jacket, oversize trousers, a Communist Party member pin adding a splash of red on the chest, a small briefcase in hand. It’s the typical dress of the typical Chinese official,

The post New York Times Lauds ‘Hip’ Communist Fashion of Dictator Xi Jinping. appeared first on The National Pulse..

AT THE VERY LEAST: To Restore Americans’ Faith In Elections, Fix Sloppy Record-Keeping: If we can enforce the Civil Rights Act of 1960’s data retention requirements, we will be able to help restore confidence in our elections. “Unfortunately, election officials across the country are not keeping the most basic data to monitor election outcomes. Even when they say they do, the numbers do not come close to matching up. It was a simple goal: match the number of voters with the number of ballots cast. After the last general election there were concerns that ballots were counted multiple times (so that there could be more ballots cast than voters who voted) and that ballots were destroyed (so that there could be more voters who voted than ballots cast). But, through our examination, we learned that it cannot be determined if these discrepancies exist, because most states and counties simply do not keep timestamped records of who voted as required by law.”

pic.twitter.com/G4OBfp5PNt — Justin Whang 🐙 (@JustinWhang) September 3, 2022   Men will understand this moment.         Bonus Clip | Paddy calls out Zuckerberg             DeSantis at UFC  

I THOUGHT THE PROBLEM WAS PLASTIC STRAWS IN KANSAS: Much of The Great Pacific Garbage Patch’s Plastic Comes From These 5 Countries. “When the authors used computer models to simulate how their samples ended up in the patch, they found that a plastic fragment was 10 times more likely to originate from fishing activities than land-based ones. . . . Less than 2 percent of simulated debris from rivers ended up offshore, carried by ocean currents. In comparison, 21 percent of trawling gear waste and 15 percent of fixed fishing gear waste drifted into the deep, and more than 85 percent of those particles never encountered land in simulations. Of all 232 plastic objects analyzed by researchers clues about their origins, roughly two-thirds were made in either Japan or China.”

THE BANNINGS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES:

UPDATE: Gina Carano’s Twitter Account Deleted as My Son Hunter Launch Nears.

The Twitter account of actress Gina Carano, who plays a leading role in the upcoming movie about Joe Biden and Hunter Biden, My Son Hunter, has been deleted.

Twitter users navigating to the actress’s page, @ginacarano, are met with a message that “this account doesn’t exist.”

This indicates that the account was not suspended by Twitter’s content moderation team. Suspensions normally come with a different message: “this account has been suspended.”

In the case of temporary account lock-outs, another tool used by Twitter to crack down on dissident speech, the user’s tweets are still visible, but they are unable to access their account until the time has expired or they meet some other condition of Twitter’s — usually deleting an offending tweet.

However, just because Carano’s account is deleted does not necessarily mean the actress did it herself. Accounts can be deleted wholesale by Twitter, although this happens rarely.

Stay tuned.

(Updated and bumped.)

Ladies and gentlemen, what the absolute heck:

Many off this week, out on their last grand chance to cling to summer. As is proper. So you might have missed a few juicy coroandoom items.

Incidentally, we’ll tackle “excess deaths” next week. Not so easy, that.

One thing is very clear: We get a great big WE TOLD YOU SO. Not that it will make the least difference.

MASKS

A few tweets first, all of which are self-explanatory.

2009 https://t.co/7hj8gPBv1N

"Using a mask incorrectly may increase the risk of transmission, rather than reduce it, the WHO noted.“

"Surgical masks didn’t stop the spread of flu / respiratory illnesses during a 5-week study involving 1,936 health-care workers at 24 hospitals" pic.twitter.com/xtnHIvVxpH

— Orwell2024 (@orwell2022) August 30, 2022

1/
The authors of this newest mask study acknowledge that masked districts exempted masked close contacts (all) from testing, but still claim it is legitimate. Let’s explore. https://t.co/DHEth5DP4S

— Emily Burns? DMs welcome #TeamReality (@Emily_Burns_V) August 11, 2022

New Nature paper.

Bottom line:

They sampled masks from 109 volunteers and found that they are riddled with culturable pathogenic bacterial and fungal colonies which can potentially cause respiratory infections.

Immunocompromised should avoid masks.https://t.co/8FBFRTvelB

1/ pic.twitter.com/qBiyl5qq7g

— Jonathan Engler ? (@jengleruk) July 19, 2022

I was chatting with a Chinaman—a perfectly harmless, perfectly descriptive word, like Englishman or Latino, that somebody told me is now a slur; Why, I asked; I don’t know, I was told; Which part offends, China or man, I asked; I don’t know, I was told; So I’m using it, I said; You always were an idiot, Briggs, I was told—and he was asking what else beside masks could account for China’s remarkable success with the doom. Lying, I said.

Here’s the official body count, from a country with 1.4 billion souls:

Long-time readers will recall I was cautious, even too cautious, in ascribing lying to explain the numbers coming from China early in the panic. Everything was happening too fast, I thought, for lies to be well coordinated. And, do not forget, nobody knew with certainty what the panic would become.

Well, I was wrong. China was lying from the beginning. Perhaps not about everything, but certainly most things.

The total number of ascribed doom deaths in all of China is, as of this date, 5,226. With a hair under 1 million “cases”.

No.

Even supposing, as we heard early in the panic from the CDC, that only about 6% of all doom deaths had doom as the sole cause of death, the 5,226 number is absurd. Not even in the realm of believeability. It’s easier to believe a Chinaman can get pregnant.

Nor can we credit the paltry million “cases”. Especially given the panic is still on in China. People in certain areas have to be tested daily and must carry tracking devices (like you do, dear reader) on which their testing status is displayed. There is no chance, based on what we know, China is telling the truth.

The doom death rate in China is, by Google’s figures, 3.7 per million. Our World In Data has 3.0. Want to know a country that has a lower number?

North Korea. Point oh two (0.2). They say.

No. China is lying.

Maybe so, admitted my chatmate. But, he said, he had worn a mask the entire time and has not yet died. Quod erat demonstrandum.

I don’t want to dismiss that argument too quickly, because it is convincing to many. We can try countering it with a lot of blah-blah-blah about evidence, statistics, and modeling, as you and I have been doing these last two and half years. Even if we nail that part, and we did, it wouldn’t be understood by most, and wasn’t. It’s much, much easier for most to believe the Expert who says “Do as I say.” And so they do.

It turns out, in the USA, that you are a fascist if you do not wear a mask. Yes. And a Health Supremacist. Yes.

MODELS

Indeed…

The sequel: pic.twitter.com/Sdhsj9Kgv4

— David Cameron (@Con2704) August 24, 2022

Who out there remembers our litany about models? Anybody? How about mask wearers? Any of you?

Here’s our problem. The models stink. They have the aroma of a Portland Starbucks toilet after an Antifa rally. They smell like the inside of a furry costume after the Houston Pride parade. They…but enough. You have the idea.

Whatever the scent, the models were believed. And still are.

It’s easy to see why Experts still believe. “Shut up,” they explain. “We’re in charge and you’re not,” they clarify.

We can’t overcome that kind of logic. But what about ordinary civilians? They still believe, and I’d bet any you show that picture to would not swap belief and doubt. Trust in Experts and “the system” is still too strong.

Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here; Or go to PayPal directly. For Zelle, use my email.

This is normal. I have consulted with many experts and they tell me that this is very normal indeed.

The long and vengeful campaign of Oberlin College against a small family-owned grocery has come to an end at the cost of a breathtaking $36 million for defamation. The Ohio Supreme Court had rejected what should be Oberlin College’s final appeal of a verdict in favor of Gibson’s Bakery. The bakery has been the target of an unrelenting attack by the school after it had the temerity to fight a false charge of racism in a shoplifting case involving Oberlin students who later pleaded guilty to criminal charges. Oberlin President Carmen Twillie Ambar and the Board burned through millions in litigation costs above the damages rather than admit that the college was wrong in the targeting of this grocery. That money could have been used for scholarships and other worthy purposes. Instead, Amber and the Board will simply ask alumni to foot the bill for a legal effort that seems to become little more than a revenge fetish.

Starting in 2017, I have written a long line of columns on the lawsuit against Oberlin College in this case where the college not only joined the mob but helped lead the mob against Gibson’s Bakery. Even after a massive award by the jury, Ambar continued to refuse to apologize for the shameful and costly conduct of her administration. (Ambar became president in 2017 shortly after the incident).

This controversy began with a shoplifting case. In 2016, an African American student named Jonathan Aladin was caught trying to steal a bottle of wine from Gibson’s Bakery, which was established in 1885 and has been closely tied to the college for over a century. When the grandson of the owner tried to stop Aladin, a fight ensued and police were called. Aladin and two other students, Cecilia Whettstone and Endia Lawrence, were arrested. Students, professors, and administrators held protests, charging that the bakery was racist and profiled the three students.

Oberlin maintained in court filings that the son and grandson of the owners of Gibson’s Bakery “violently and unreasonably attacked” an unarmed student, but that is not how the police viewed it. Aladin was charged with robbery, which is a second degree felony, and Whettstone and Lawrence were charged with first degree misdemeanor assault. Police rejected claims of a racial motive and noted that, over a period of five years, 40 adults were arrested for shoplifting at Gibson’s Bakery, but only six were African American. It also is not how the court viewed it. When prosecutors cut a plea deal to reduce the charge to attempted theft, a local judge refused. He said the plea deal appeared to be the result of a permanent “economic sanction”by the college in which the victim had little choice but to relent. Ultimately, all three students pleaded guilty.

The merits of the case did not seem to bother Oberlin officials or student protesters. Dean of Students Meredith Raimondo reportedly joined the massive protests and even handed out a flier denouncing the bakery as a racist business. When some people contacted Oberlin to object that the students admitted guilt, special assistant to the president for community and government relations Tita Reed wrote that it did not change a “damn thing” for her. Reed also reportedly participated in the campus protests.

Other faculty members encouraged students who denounced the bakery. The chairman of Africana studies posted, “Very proud of our students!” Oberlin barred purchases from the bakery, pending its investigation into whether this was “a pattern and not an isolated incident.” Raimondo also pressured Bon Appetit, a major contractor with the college, to cease business with the bakery. Reed even suggested that “once charges are dropped, orders will resume” and added that she was “baffled by their combined audacity and arrogance to assume the position of victim.”

The jury in June 2019 awarded the Gibsons $44 million in compensatory and punitive damages. A judge later reduced the award to $25 million. That was upheld and the appellate court also upheld an award of $6.2 million payment in attorney fees. Now interest has pushed the reduced award back up to roughly $36 million but you then have to add the attorney fees and the college’s own towering legal costs. That is likely to put the total back to near the original $44 million award.

It takes considerable work to burn over $40 million on such a case. Yet, time and again President Ambar and the college threw more money into a losing hand like a bad gambler at Vegas while refusing to apologize for the college’s reprehensible record in the case.

As the grocery recently warned that it might have to shutdown due to the lack of funds and drain of litigation, the college fought to pay the damages.

The Ohio Supreme Court finally ended this farce by refusing to hear a new appeal on jurisdictional grounds. It voted 4-3 to end further litigation.

In a statement, Oberlin College expressed disappointment but not an apology:

“Oberlin is disappointed that the Ohio Supreme Court has chosen not to hear our appeal of the Gibson’s Bakery judgment against the college. The issues raised by this case have been challenging, not only for the parties involved, but for the entire Oberlin community. We remain committed to strengthening the partnership between the College, the City of Oberlin and its residents, and the downtown business community. We will continue in that important work while remaining focused on our core educational mission.”

While the college could always try a federal appeal, it would just add more litigation costs while little hope for a change in the case or the verdict beyond further accruing interest.

The handling of this matter by Oberlin is nothing short of reprehensible in not only the treatment of this grocery (which was founded in the 1800s) but in the wasting of the assets and reputation of the college. Yet, not a single official appears to have been disciplined for this costly campaign. With tuition at $30,000 a year, the ultimate cost of this litigation would cover free tuition for a year for half of the college. (The total enrollment is only 2,600 students).

Yet, over $40 million somehow became little more than the price of vanity of a college to refuse to admit its original error and to apologize for its conduct. It was a complete failure of leadership by the president, the board, and the college. No one seemed willing to take the responsibility to say “enough” and stop the burning of added costs year after year. So the college continued to gush money as it racked up losses in court.

They have frittered away the assets and reputation of a school with a wonderful history and stellar academic reputation . . . all to pursue a small grocery like Captain Ahab and his whale. Indeed, the final filing should just quote Melville to capture the blind rage needed to sustain this ill-conceived effort: “From hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee.”

Rising temperatures and other environmental changes could make it easier to locate Scotland's elusive monster. There are few cryptozoological mysterie...

She is the second woman this month to reportedly be given a lengthy prison sentence by Saudi authorities for her social media activity

"All congressional inquiries and correspondence from Members, committees, and staff should be immediately directed to OLA upon receipt"

ANOTHER WIN FOR THE NEW CIVIL LIBERTIES ALLIANCE: Colorado Landowner’s Takings Claim Against EPA Advances After Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss.

Today, Judge Armando Bonilla of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a decision from the bench in favor of NCLA’s client and denying a motion to dismiss in Todd Hennis v. The United States of America. Mr. Hennis filed a lawsuit against the United States for the physical taking of his property without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) caused an environmental catastrophe that preceded and culminated in the invasion, occupation, taking, and confiscation of Mr. Hennis’s downstream property, an action for which he has been seeking redress ever since. This ruling means the U.S. Court of Federal Claims is allowing Mr. Hennis’s lawsuit to go forward to discovery, and ultimately to trial.

On August 5, 2015, EPA destroyed the portal to the Gold King Mine, located in Silverton, Colorado. Upon doing so, the agency released a toxic sludge of over 3,000,000 gallons of acid mine drainage and 880,000 pounds of heavy metals into the Animas River watershed. EPA was entirely unprepared to prevent or control the contaminated flows that gushed out once it breached the Gold King Mine portal. EPA eventually mobilized supplies and equipment onto Mr. Hennis’s downstream property to address the immediate after-effects of its actions. Ignoring Mr. Hennis’s explicit instructions and the scope of the access that was granted, EPA constructed a multimillion-dollar water treatment facility on his land. The U.S. Government has never paid Mr. Hennis any compensation for either flooding or appropriating his property for public use. It has instead squatted on his lands for seven years and counting.

Mr. Hennis did not voluntarily give EPA permission to construct and operate a water treatment facility on his property. EPA built the facility without his knowledge or consent, and it later coerced him into allowing access to his lands by threatening him with extortionate fines (over $59,000 per day) should he exercise his property rights. Mr. Hennis eventually refused to sign an access document, so EPA is currently occupying his property by operation of the agency’s own administrative order—and threatening him with fines if he challenges it.

The United States has incurred well over $44,500,000 in past response costs related to the environmental disaster that it created when it destroyed the Gold King Mine portal. It has estimated that it will incur an additional $20.7 million in future response costs at this site. None of those costs include compensating Mr. Hennis for the physical taking of his property. So long as EPA operates the water treatment facility, stores the waste from such operations, conducts other investigative and remedial activities, and otherwise accesses and occupies Mr. Hennis’s property, he cannot use or take any substantial steps toward development of it. By denying the U.S. Government’s motion to dismiss, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has finally given Mr. Hennis his day in court to challenge the EPA’s violation of his constitutional rights.

Reminder: I am on the NCLA’s Board of Advisors.

AMERICA’S NEWSPAPER OF RECORD: Ark Of The Covenant Unboxing Video Goes Horribly Wrong.

ENDORSED: What’s good for beer should be good for bourbon. Make home distilling legal.

The prohibition on home distilling creates an artificial barrier to entry to budding entrepreneurs who want to perfect their distilling skills at home. It also turns everyday citizens into felons simply for engaging in an activity that is lawful for industry titans, but not for them.

Fortunately, the craft beer industry provides a policy template that home distillers ought to be allowed to use moving forward. After prohibition ended in 1933, home brewing, much like home distilling, remained illegal. Only those permitted to operate could make and sell beer. This was the case until October 14, 1978, when President Jimmy Carter signed a bill legalizing the practice of home brewing. Many breweries that are now established institutions got their start in basements or garages, experimenting with unique techniques and flavors, thanks to the legalization of homebrewing. The craft spirits industry could find itself in a similar situation if proper reforms were made.

I agree.

THE NINTH CIRCUIT RULES AGAINST RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY: San Jose Unified School District Discriminated Against Fellowship of Christian Athletes, based on the FCA’s requirement that leaders “abide by a Statement of Faith, which includes the belief that sexual relations should be limited within the context of a marriage between a man and a woman” — so holds a Ninth Circuit’s panel. “Under strict scrutiny, the government can prevail only if it shows that its restrictions on religion ‘are justified by a compelling interest and [are] narrowly tailored to advance that interest.’ Given that high bar, the defendants do not argue that their policies can pass muster under strict scrutiny; rather, they contend that strict scrutiny does not apply at all because their policies are neutral and generally applicable. But the record before us shows that the School District’s non-discrimination policies have been, and continue to be, selectively enforced against FCA. Other secular student groups maintain facially discriminatory membership criteria but enjoy ASB recognition. . . . More than a whiff, a stench of animus against the students’ religious beliefs pervades the Pioneer High School campus.”

Double standards and selective enforcement are the bread and butter of leftist administrators. But wait, it gets better (or worse):

Pioneer’s Climate Committee—the body that led the district-wide push for FCA derecognition—had members that expressed remarkably similar hostile statements. Peter Glasser was the most forthcoming about his contempt for FCA’s religious beliefs. The day after learning about FCA’s religious-based views on marriage and sexuality, Glasser channeled his inner Martin Luther, pinning the Statement of Faith and Sexual Purity Statement to his classroom whiteboard along with his grievances. But instead of a reformation, Glasser demanded an inquisition. As he explained in emails sent to Principal Espiritu, FCA’s “bullshit” views “have no validity” and amount to heresy because they violated “my truth.” Glasser believed “attacking these views is the only way to make a better campus” and proclaimed that he would not be an “enabler for this kind of ‘religious freedom’ anymore.”

Glasser’s desire to attack FCA’s views makes plain that FCA, putting it charitably, was “less than fully welcome” on Pioneer’s campus. Glasser’s comments also improperly imputed insincerity to FCA’s religious views by referring to their beliefs as an exercise in (air quotes) “religious freedom.”

Glasser was not the only skeptic. Michelle Bowman also serves on the Climate Committee and as faculty advisor to the Satanic Temple Club. In discussing this lawsuit with a former student, she opined that “evangelicals, like FCA, are charlatans and not in the least bit Christian,” and “choose darkness over knowledge and they perpetuate ignorance.” But it is not for Bowman to dictate what beliefs are genuinely Christian.

Not hardly. But wait, there’s more:

Equally telling was the continued hostility towards FCA even after it lost ASB recognition and thus could not possibly violate the School District’s non-discrimination policies. In an effort “to ban FCA completely from campus,” Glasser ginned up another potential “avenue” of attack during Summer 2019. He posited that FCA could be accused of violating the School District’s sexual harassment policy by creating “a hostile work environment for students and faculty.” In other words, teenagers—meeting privately to discuss the Bible—were creating a hostile work environment for adult faculty, according to Glasser. There is no indication in the record that Glasser’s inimical view of FCA was rebuffed.

Win or lose in court, why send your kids to be educated by horrible, awful people like these? Why support them with tax dollars?

Civil liberties law firm that already sued Michigan State on behalf of employees outs university for rejecting pleas from student, medical provider who documented life-threatening blood clot following second Pfizer dose.

“This looks like Russian intelligence. This walks like Russian intelligence. This talks like Russian intelligence,” Bash said

OH MY: FBI special agent who opened Trump investigation reportedly escorted out of Bureau headquarters.

Former Washington Field Office Special Agent in Charge Tim Thibault was reportedly escorted out of the Bureau’s headquarters on Friday, amid whistleblower allegations that he showed political bias in his handling of politically sensitive investigations.

The Washington Times reported eyewitness accounts that “Mr. Thibault was seen exiting the bureau’s elevator last Friday escorted by two or three ‘headquarters-looking types.'”

Whistleblowers alleged that Thibault concealed the partisan nature of evidence from FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland to secure their approval to open an investigation into former President Donald Trump. That investigation culminated in the FBI’s raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate earlier this month.

Developing…

I’ve mentioned the phenomenon of “lying flat” previously — people choosing to adopt a minimal work, minimal consumption lifestyle.

One could dismiss this as the attitude of “aimless Gen-Zers” — but now in China, it is spreading from the workers to the entrepreneurs.

In a nutshell: doing hard-driving business and going the extra mile in pursuit of profit are now increasingly perceived as a losing game, or no longer worth it. Between repeated weeks-long lockdowns as the CCP continues its Möbius Dick pursuit of the “zero COVID” white whale, the general economic malaise domestically, and export markets shrinking as countries in the developed world diversify supply chains away from China — not so much because of the CCP’s human rights abuses, but because supply from China has become too erratic — … entrepreneurs great and small cash in while they can, downsize, or go to bare survival business mode (“lying flat”).

And besides, even if you become a multi-millionaire, the CCP bureaucracy can strip you bare because of some selective-enforced offense, or because you didn’t say “All hail Chairman Xi, king of the turtle-‘lovers’” with enough enthusiasm… And now it’s even become increasingly difficult to move your money abroad to buy assets the CCP regime cannot readily expropriate…

In turn, the “lying flat” causes either layoffs or a dearth of available jobs, which in turn reduces discretionary spending, which in turn makes the domestic business environment even more difficult…

Steven Levitt’s “Freakonomics” can be condensed down to two basic economic laws:

1. Humans respond to incentives

2. There is no other law of economics

The way ahead in today’s China is no longer through hard work or entrepreneurial acumen — it’s through corruption and brown-nosing your way up the CCP hierarchy. Small wonder the Chinese economic house of cards is teetering.

I’m a little skeptical the system will catastrophically collapse like some are predicting/hoping. But China has some very difficult years ahead of it. No wonder Emperor Xi is looking for anything to divert his people’s attention — even a military confrontation with the West over Taiwan. Remember how the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 started with the Tsar being told what his restive population needed was “a short victorious war”… Of course, it didn’t end that way…

CASTREAU’S KINGDOM OF DEATH:  Canada’s Euthanasia Polices Under Scrutiny As Reports Surface Of Euthanizing A Man For “Hearing Loss”.

The United Kingdom has rolled out a financial compensation program for individuals and families who have been harmed by the COVID-19 vaccine, despite repeated claims by U.S. corporate media entities denying any negative health impacts of the vaccines created by their largest advertisers. Under the program, the first payments, which amount to a maximum of almost $150,000, have already been made to family members of individuals injured or killed as a result of the experimental vaccine. Vikki Spit, whose 48-year-old partner Zion became unwell eight days after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine and ultimately, is believed to be the first recipient

The post The British Government Has Begun Paying $140,000 for COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Victims. appeared first on The National Pulse..

TAKE NOTE: Japan Will Restart Nuclear Reactors and Build New Nuclear.

Also: China’s 2 Megawatt Molten-salt Thorium Nuclear Reactor Has Start up Approval.

LET ME JUST GET OUT AHEAD OF THE STORY AND SAY THAT GHISLAINE MAXWELL DID NOT COMMIT SUICIDE: Former Phoenix reporter who broke story of Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting found dead.

Related article from America’s Newspaper of Record: Apple TV+ Announces New Show ‘Clintons In Cars Killing Witnesses.’ “‘Get in the car! We’re going suiciding!’ yelled Hillary Clinton to her daughter as the cameras began rolling. ‘You got the snacks, right? Faking a hanging always makes me hungry. Bodies are so heavy!’”

(Via Small Dead Animals.)

I REMEMBER WHEN JERRY POURNELLE WAS WRITING ABOUT SPACE TELESCOPES THAT COULD DO THING LIKE THIS: James Webb telescope finds first evidence of carbon dioxide on an exoplanet.

Related: Scientists say exoplanet 100 light years from Earth may be covered with deep ocean.

We have been following conflicts over official statements or acknowledgements on diversity, colonialism, or privilege at universities. These conflicts often involve concerns over free speech or academic freedom. The most recent controversy has arisen at Cornell University and involves a challenge to an official declaration that the university perpetuates “settler colonialism, indigenous dispossession, slavery, racism, classism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, antisemitism, and ableism.” The statement was posted on its School of Integrative Plant Science’s website and, according to the site College Fix, one academic has objected: Randy Wayne, associate professor in the School of Integrative Plant Science in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

The statement is attributed to the SIPS Diversity and Inclusion Council, which formed last October.

In response, Professor Wayne wrote to Chelsea Specht, associate dean for diversity and inclusion for the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, with the following response.

Dear Chelsea,

I write to you as the new Associate Director of the School of Integrative Plant Science.

The article entitled, “SIPS Community Commits to Diversity and Inclusion” on the CALS website states that “The Council’s vision is for an inclusive SIPS community that flourishes because it values and supports diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice. It recognizes that our institution was founded on and perpetuates various injustices. These include settler colonialism, indigenous dispossession, slavery, racism, classism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, antisemitism, and ableism.” I do not believe that the sentences I have put in bold are true. If you believe that these statements are fact and not fiction, true and not false, would you please provide me with your evidence so that I too will believe what is factual and truthful?

I am attaching a link about James Sumner: https://chemindigest.com/james-b-sumner-1887-1955/ He was a Cornell professor who had one arm. I assume that when he was hired, Cornell was not ableist. Good thing. He went on to prove that enzymes were proteins and won the 1946 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. I teach about Sumner’s work in Plant Cell Biology. I show my students and let them hold his Nobel medal which is in the Rare and Manuscript Collection at Cornell. Sumner ended his Nobel lecture by saying, “We can sum up by saying that as the result of discoveries in the field of enzyme chemistry some questions have been answered and many new questions have arisen. We live in an expanding universe in more senses than that of the astronomers.” I would like to believe that one of the senses of the expanding universe today is in gaining a more truthful rather than a false understanding of the world around us. Your answer to this email will help me clarify how the universe is expanding.

Specht replied with an offer to meet and added:

“We can talk about the role of mindset in building an inclusive culture, and perhaps find some shared values that are not about fact or fiction, true or false, but about recognizing the role we can each play in ensuring an equitable future – for ourselves, our colleagues, and our students.”

The suggestion that the academics move beyond “fact or fiction, true or false” is rather curious since the statement makes an affirmative and shocking series of accusations. It is also hard to see how this statements fosters “an inclusive culture” if this list of current prejudices and abusive practices is not factually true.

The concern for academics is that such statements put pressure on colleagues to follow suit with their own public testimonials. We saw this trend start years ago. We discussed the controversy over the acting Northwestern Law Dean declaring publicly “I am James Speta and I am a racist.” He was followed by Emily Mullin, executive director of major gifts, who announced, “I am a racist and a gatekeeper of white supremacy. I will work to be better.” We have had others like a Brandeis dean declare “Yes, all White people are racists.”

Such statements are becoming more common while a minority of faculty raise objections. Likewise, the growing use of land acknowledgments has been opposed by some faculty as “performative acts of conformity.”

That brings us back to the offer to meet on the Cornell statement but expressly not to discuss the factual accuracy of the claim that the university “perpetuates various injustices [including] settler colonialism, indigenous dispossession, slavery, racism, classism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, antisemitism, and ableism.”

Thankfully, Professor Wayne has not been the subject of a cancel campaign as have others who have raised such objections. However, both students and faculty have been targeted at Cornell for raising such objections. This includes efforts to fire Cornell Law School professor William A. Jacobson for offering dissenting views on the Black Lives Matter movement, a campaign fueled by some of his own colleagues.

From the published account, Associate Dean Specht does not appear inclined to discuss the merits of the posting or the basis for the claim. Yet, this is the type of controversy that would make for a worthy and civil discussion for the university as a whole. The university likely does have institutional failings or abuses in the past that should be acknowledged but it should also recognize the progress and current status of the university on such issues. If the university is continuing to perpetuate all of these terrible prejudices and practices (including apparently “slavery”), the school should be able to produce proof so that the abuses can be addressed. That means that there may be a modicum of effort to address whether the self-condemnation of the school is “fact or fiction, true or false.”