Category Archives: Covid

Why we need to mock the virus pests & the Corona astrologers & the pandemicists

Don't elevate them by calling them evil, says eugyppius

Eugyppius makes a great point about how to treat those who would impose tyranny on us.

However, he doesn’t deny that evil exists and that it was at work in the pandemic. Here’s the most important excerpt from his article:

As for the evil: It lurks in the interstices of our bureaucratic institutions, which, as they have grown in size and complexity since the nineteenth century, behave in ways that are increasingly impossible to understand and contrary to human flourishing. They are massive machines constructed of human parts, which will continue to chew up our health, our culture and our lives, until we figure out a way to stop them. At base, I think my critics also know that this is true. There were no great hopes that the American public health establishment would suddenly become more reasonable in the wake of Anthony Fauci’s retirement, for example, or that Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation means that Scotland is now safe from future pandemicist hysteria. These sorry creatures are the mere fleeting incarnations of complex institutional forces, which have no shortage of willing servants.

Pandemic Treaty Will Usher in Unelected One World Government

It's a two-pronged attack, says Joseph Mercola

Full text here.

Attack No 1 is “International Health Regulation Amendments”.

Under the new amendments, however, the WHO would be able to declare a PHEIC [Public Health Emergency of International Concern] in a member state over the objection of that state, and failure to adhere to the WHO’s dictates in such a situation could have severe economic consequences.

Attack No 2 is the “WHO Pandemic Treaty”.

Right now, it looks like the WHO Pandemic Treaty may also be ratified at the World Health Assembly in May 2024, if it gets the two-thirds majority it needs to pass.8,9 The WHO is seeking permanent and unilateral power to make pandemic decisions for the world, and the proposed treaty is the vehicle that would allow this.

It will grant the WHO the sole power to make decisions relating to global biosecurity, including but not limited to the implementation of a global vaccine passport/digital identity, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions and standardized medical care. Importantly, the treaty will supersede the laws of member states, including the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The WHO Is Corrupt and Inept

Even if centralizing biosecurity were a good idea, which it’s not, the WHO would not be at the top of the list of organizations to be charged with this task, seeing how its “curriculum vitae” is a long list of failures and scandalous conflicts of interest.

For example, the WHO didn’t publicly admit SARS-CoV-2 was airborne until the end of December 2021, yet scientists knew the virus was airborne within weeks of the pandemic being declared. The WHO also ignored early advice about airborne transmission.

The fact that the WHO has installed Dr. Jeremy Farrar, former head of the Wellcome Trust, as its chief scientist is yet another sign that the WHO’s health recommendations will be far from trustworthy. As previously reported, Farrar was one of the key figures in the coordinated cover-up of the origin of SARS-CoV-2, along with Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Overall, the WHO is woefully unqualified to make health decisions for the whole world. But with this treaty in place, member nations will be subject to the WHO’s dictates even if citizens have rejected such plans using local democratic processes. In short, every country that signs onto the WHO’s pandemic treaty will voluntarily give up its sovereignty and the bodily autonomy of all its citizens to one of the most corrupt organizations on the planet.

[…]

The Pandemic Treaty Is Based on a Flawed Premise

Aside from the fact that this treaty will eradicate the national sovereignty of member states, a core problem is that it simply cannot work. The whole premise behind this pandemic treaty is that “shared threat requires shared response,” but a given threat is almost never equally shared across regions.

Take COVID-19 for example. Not only is the risk of COVID not the same for people in New York City and the outback of Australia, it’s not even the same for all the people in those areas, as COVID is highly dependent on age and underlying health conditions.The WHO intends to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed, and this can only result in needless suffering and loss of individual freedom.

The WHO insists that the remedy is the same for everyone everywhere, yet the risks vary widely from nation to nation, region to region, person to person. They intend to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed, and this can only result in needless suffering — not to mention the loss of individual freedom.

[…]

The Gateway to Global Totalitarianism

It’s important to realize that the WHO’s pandemic treaty will radically alter the global power structure and strip you of some of your most basic rights and freedoms. It’s a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.

The treaty is basically the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime where human rights as we understand them will no longer exist. Biosecurity will be the justification for an international vaccine passport, which the G20 just signed on to, and that passport will also be your digital identification.

That digital ID, in turn, will be tied to your social credit score, personal carbon footprint tracker, medical records, educational records, work records, social media presence, purchase records, your bank accounts and a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Once all these pieces are fully connected, you’ll be in a digital prison, and the ruling cabal — whether officially a one world government by then or not — will have total control over your life from cradle to grave.

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is what sets off this chain of events, as it will have the power to implement vaccine passports globally once the treaty is signed. The WHO will also have the power to mandate vaccines, standardize medical care and issue travel restrictions.

Google Searches for “Maternity Clothes” down 12-15% in the United States

Are people becoming infertile or are maternity clothes going out of style?

From Igor Chudov’s newsletter.

Google has a “trends” page that allows anyone to see long-term trends for a particular search term.

Since timely statistics on recent births or pregnancies are not easily available in the USA, I decided to see the long-term five-year trend for the search term “maternity clothes” (archive link). As you would imagine, maternity clothes would be sought by a pregnant woman or by someone wanting to buy them for a pregnant woman in their life. So this search is associated with pregnancies.

Continue reading here.

“BBC accidentally admits COVID Vaccine is to blame for 2022 being Worst Year for Excess Deaths in Half a Century”

"After 'Journalists' choose to lie believing nobody would 'mark their Homework'"

Writes the Exposé:

It was all going so well for the BBC and its reporters until they decided to unequivocally state that in no way shape or form is the Covid-19 vaccine responsible for a record-breaking year of death. They even provided a “source” to prove it and claimed that –

‘Figures up to June 2022 looking at deaths from all causes show unvaccinated people were more likely to die than vaccinated people.’

They then went on to state that –

”If vaccines were driving excess deaths we would expect this to be the other way around.”If vaccines were driving excess deaths we would expect this to be the other way around.

The problem for BBC News and its dishonest reporters is that The Expose has been analysing the source in question, which has been provided by a UK Government institution known as the Office for National Statistics (ONS) for months on end.

And we can reveal that mortality rates per 100,000 in every single age group, even children, in England and Wales were lowest among the unvaccinated in some age groups as early as 2021, and lowest among the unvaccinated in all age groups by May 2022 at the latest.

Therefore, BBC News has not only lied to the public, but they have also admitted in black and white that the Covid-19 injections are to blame for 2022 being the worst year for deaths in half a century by confirming that “if vaccines were driving excess deaths we would expect this to be the other way around (highest mortality rates among the vaccinated)”.

More on this, and the actual data, can be found here.

Evidence of evil among us

The UK's ex-health secretary's publicised WhattApp chats on the lockdowns

Writes Brendan O’Neill:

They were laughing at us. They didn’t only lock us down. They didn’t only suspend virtually every one of our civil liberties, including a right none of us ever expected to lose: the right to leave our own homes. They didn’t only spy on us with drones, and encourage us to snitch on that neighbour going for a sneaky second jog, and fine teenagers life-ruining sums of money for holding house parties. They also chuckled about it. It was funny to them. In one of the most startling WhatsApp chats revealed in the Daily Telegraph’s Lockdown Files, a senior civil servant says the following about Brits returning from trips abroad who were forced to quarantine in a stuffy hotel room for 10 days: ‘Hilarious.’

[…]

We now know that sections of the political elite relished the power lockdown gave them. At points they seemed almost drunk on tyranny.

[…]

A few months later, Hancock was increasingly irate about the Sweden issue, the possibility that this nation that didn’t enforce a sweeping lockdown might be doing quite well. I am sick of the ‘fucking Sweden argument’, he said. ‘Supply three or four bullet [points] of why Sweden is wrong’, he demanded of his aides.

That is extraordinary, no? […] Hancock notably did not ask whether Sweden was wrong but why it was wrong. He wasn’t interested in openly discussing pandemic policy, but rather in insulating his own lockdown ideology from contrasting or contradictory ideas and data. 

[…]

Hancock was resisting advice from chief medical officer Chris Whitty to test everyone entering care homes. According to the leaked texts, Hancock was seemingly concerned that such an endeavour would ‘muddy the waters’ of lockdown messaging. The leaked WhatsApps have led many to conclude that Hancock was especially worried that care-home testing would distract attention from his big, virtuous, legacy-defining effort to ensure that there would be 100,000 Covid tests a day in the broader community. A reminder: 45,000 care-home residents in England and Wales perished from Covid.

[…]

Nothing speaks better to the warped moralism of the Covid era than the fact that sceptics like Heneghan who argued for the elderly and frail to be protected have been demonised as dangerous ‘Covid deniers’, while government officials whose policies had a direct and catastrophic impact on the health of the elderly and frail were, for a period of time at least, treated as unimpeachable voices of moral authority. We need a complete reversal of the Covid narrative. If I see one more angry article in the supposedly liberal media railing against Heneghan or Gupta or any of the others who said ‘Let’s plough our resources into protecting the vulnerable’, now that we know our lockdown elites failed to protect the vulnerable, I will lose it.

[…]

Ms Oakeshott is a backstabber and a money-grubber for revealing these WhatsApp messages, some are saying. Oh stop it. Nothing could be more in the public interest than knowing the thinking behind an ideology and a policy that wrecked civil liberty, suspended democracy, sickened the elderly, hurt the working classes, quarantined the developing world, and led to a suspension of that most key of civilised endeavours: the education of children. A pandemic hit, and the political elite, and the media elite, opted for social tyranny, censorship, non-debate, classism and fearmongering over taking a more rational, liberal, focused approach to the risk of disease. We need to know all about this, so that we might guard against it in the future.

On the Covid lab leak story

It's a rear-guard action by our minders, says Catte Black

The “covid was a lab leak” story was always a back door official narrative that reinforced the reality of the “pandemic” while appearing to be a suppressed “alternative”. You know, one of those “suppressed alternatives” that end up in the WSJ. It’s now going to be used to finally bury any hope that 2020-21 will wake us up to the full modern reality of geopolitics.

Continue reading here.

Zero Carbon Agenda Deconstructed

It's leading us to absolute slavery, says the "Ice Age Farmer"

A vlogger by the name of Christian, who posts under the title “Ice Age Farmer” has posted a 54-minute video (about one year ago) about what zero carbon will really mean for the economy and society. It’s not pretty.

Here’s the video description:

What is a zero-carbon future? What does it look like? To imagine, turn off your heater. No airports. No shipping. No animals. Perfect surveillance state. In this Ice Age Farmer special report, Christian breaks The “Absolute Zero” plan and how governments are actively taking drastic steps every day to meet these dystopian goals for Travel, Transport, Energy, Manufacturing, Recycling, and Food. We must understand the reality underneath their flowery philanthropic language: Absolute Slavery.

Comedy Gold

Actor tells truth about Covid policies, media goes berserk

Writes Tom Woods (see also here):

By now you may have heard about the opening monologue that actor Woody Harrelson delivered on Saturday Night Live this past weekend.

Given the hysteria surrounding it, I assumed it had to be a full-throated attack on Big Pharma.

So I watched it, and 95 percent of it was just normal comedy.

I’m about to share with you the entirety of the portion that sent the Establishment, and those poor and pathetic souls who for some reason feel compelled to defend the Establishment, into a fit.

Harrelson tells a fanciful story about reading a movie script:

Okay, so the movie goes like this. The biggest drug cartels in the world get together and buy up all the media and all the politicians and force all the people in the world to stay locked in their homes. And people can only come out if they take the cartel’s drugs and keep taking them over and over.

I threw the script away. I mean, who is going to believe that crazy idea being forced to do drugs? I do that voluntarily all day long.

That’s it.

It’s obvious enough that the story is a reference to our Covid experience, with the lockdowns and the mandates. But note that he even softens the blow by ending it with a joke about his drug habit.

Well, this little passage — which, for heaven’s sake, obviously has the ring of truth to it — sent the media into hysterics.

Remember, Harrelson is insinuating that the media are all bought and paid for. And here’s how they reacted, as if trying to prove his point:
Note the verb choices, too — “spews,” “rambles” — intended to denigrate the speaker. And of course “conspiracy,” the ultimate dumb-guy putdown.

To my mind Harrelson is wrong about 90 percent of the time, but when he’s right, it tends to be — as in this case — about something fairly important.

But good for him, making the kind of observation that hundreds of people in public life would be making if we lived in a normal society.

Paul Joseph Watson has made a short video about this: “My God, he said what?“

Salvation through politics

How and why this false notion keeps getting enacted

Gary North often wrote that the prevailing faith in Western societies nowadays is in “salvation through politics” or “salvation through the state”.

Nearly 30 years ago, economist Thomas Sowell laid out in his book “The Vision of the Anointed” how this falsehood works in practice. Wikipedia has an entry about that book. It says that in it, Sowell “brands the anointed as promoters of a worldview concocted out of fantasy impervious to any real-world considerations.”

In an interview from 1995 (10 minutes of excerpts from it – the full 25-minute version is here) he outlines his observations.

First, he explains who the “anointed” are: The elites in leading media, universities, law and politics. One could add nowadays: in entertainment. These people believe they know better than most what needs to be done. And thus think themselves entitled to use government force to get these things done.

If an assertion is made that fits the ideas and vision of these people, they demand no evidence. They simply assume it is true and use their many and powerful channels to plant this assertion in the public’s mind.

Regarding the implementation by these people of measures to fight a perceived societal ills Sowell outlines a four-stage pattern – which we could see very clearly in action during the Covid crisis.

1. Crisis: We’re hyped to believe that something is a terrible crisis for which Something Must Be Done. Very often, the thing we are told is causing a crisis has been “getting better for years on end”. But that gets ignored.

2. A solution for this supposed crisis is suggested. The protagonists say: This will lead to beneficial results A. Critics disagree and say it will lead to detrimental results Z.

3. The suggested solution is implemented and almost immediately we get detrimental results Z.

4. Denial phase: The protagonists of the enacted measures deny that they caused Z. Because, they say, there are many factors, there’s complexities, it’s simplistic to blame it on this.

This is what we will see down the line once the media thinks it is safe to no longer suppress the evidence that lockdowns, masks and vaccines did much more harm than good.

This is what we will hear now that “saving the climate” and “supporting Ukraine” is leading to poverty and destitution.

This is what we have been hearing when discussing soaring crime rates.

And so on.

Economists tend to see through this because they are trained to think in terms of cost-benefit analysis and what is called “opportunity cost”: The cost of any action/decision is that it closes the door to other opportunities. What are they, and can we afford to lose them?

Our current elites don’t like that sort of thinking because it questions their beliefs.

Asked whether these people just don’t think their solutions might be detrimental, Sowell says there’s more to it: The solutions always gives these people more power and influence.

That is also something we see time and time again.