Category Archives: Media

The Death of Culture: How Lies Killed Books

Naomi Wolf on her recent experience in Covid-hysterical New York

Excerpts from the article:

In addition to the dissonance of seeing people who had been perfectly okay with discriminating against the very people who had fought to return to them the liberties they now enjoyed, I suffered a sense of disorientation at realizing that there was a giant cognitive hole in the middle of contemporary culture.

The staffers at the Brooklyn branch of Jackson McNally Bookstore, an independent bookstore which had for years been a stalwart outpost of free-thinking publishing, were still masked, against all reason. I walked in with some trepidation.

Peacefully, faces covered, three years on, they stacked books on the shelves.

I was astonished, as I wandered the well-stocked aisles. Independent bookstores usually reflect the burning issues in a culture at that given time.

But — now — nothing.

[…]

The bizarre thing about this moment in culture, is that the really important journalism, and the really important nonfiction books about the history, the racial and gender injustice, the economics, the public policy, of the “pandemic” years — are being written by — non-writers; by people who are trained as doctors, medical researchers, lawyers, politicians, and activists.

And their books are not displayed or even stocked in bookstores such as Jackson McNally.

So there is a massive hole in the central thought process of our culture.

The courageous non-writers have stepped in to tell the truth, because the famous writers, for the most part, can’t.

Or won’t. Or, for whatever reason, didn’t.

This is because the public intellectuals are by necessity, for the most part, AWOL to the truth-telling demands of this time.

You cannot be a public intellectual whose work is alive, if you have participated in manufacturing, or even accepting quietly, state-run lies.

[…]

“People just want to move on,” I keep hearing, in my former haunts in Manhattan and Brooklyn.

Don’t talk about it.

So this all leads to a weird situation, culturally, now, indeed.

In the world of alt-media independent exiled dissidents, where I live most of the time, we are having the most riveting, important conversations of our lives. This is because we all know civilization itself, and liberty itself, and maybe even the fate of the human race itself, are at stake every day.

In the polite elite-media circles of Brooklyn and New York, to which I returned briefly to dip a toe in the water, people are — not talking about any of it.

They are not talking about the enslavement of humanity. They are not talking about young adults dropping dead.

[…]

We don’t fight for freedom so that we can get credit.

We don’t fight for truth because we want a byline.

We do both just because we can’t help it.

We do both because our Founders fought to the death so that we ourselves would be free one day.

And we fight so that little children whom we will never live to see, will grow up free.

But it is painful to witness the beating heart of what had been a great culture, stunned and muted in denial, and unable to function intellectually.

I guess we just need to leave the sadly rotting carcass of the establishment culture of lies and denial behind.

I say that with sorrow. I will miss the bookstores, universities, newspapers that I once revered.

I guess we have to follow the voices of the truth-tellers of the moment, to other, surprising, beleaguered campfires.

I guess we need to pitch our tents in new fields, outside the walls of the crumbling, breached, and decadent city.

I guess we need to learn new songs and tell new stories, as we find ourselves alongside other — surprising — fierce, and unbowed, and determined, new comrades in arms.

Lots of data on vaccination status and Covid deaths in UK

From the Exposé

The article starts off with a quote from Ara Darzi, a member of the House of Lords, who wrote in the “Times” on 3rd October 2022: “‘The latest stage in the battle against Covid-19 has begun. Across the UK people aged over 50 are being called for vaccination with a booster this autumn to protect them against a likely new wave of infection this winter. But how many will accept it?”

The article goes on to say:

“

Darzi, who also just happens to be the director of the Institute of Global Health Innovation at Imperial College, London then went on to claim the following –

  • The growing anti-vaccine movement is a threat to public health here (UK) and across the Globe.
  • Over 3.7 million people in Britain (6.4 per cent) are yet to have a single dose of the Covid vaccine.
  • The risk of death is 14 times higher in the unvaccinated and without full coverage, the danger to the wider population is increased.
  • Thousands of deaths have been linked to vaccine refusal. Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that 37,961 unvaccinated people in the UK died with Covid-19 mentioned on their death certificates between January 2021 and March 2022.

The article then exposes these claims as totally false, proving this with lots of data, much of which in chart form. Well worth keeping.

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.

Environmentalist Enemies of Human Civilization

Thomas DiLorenzo writes:

In the late 1980s the late Professor Murray Weidenbaum, who was the chairman of President Reagan’s council of economic advisors, invited me to spend a year at his Center for the Study of American Business at Washington University in St. Louis, which I did.  I had no teaching duties and published quite a lot that year, and continued my association with the Center for years afterwards.  Because of that association, and because the Center had published several articles of mine on environmental policy, I was invited to a big conference at the Sundance Institute in Sundance, Utah in January during the early ’90s that was attended by all the big D.C. environmental organizations on one hand, and by a collection of big corporation executives and academics on the other.  On the opening night the Sierra Club/Wilderness Society/etc. crowd presented a video that they said explained their philosophy and their way of thinking of environmental issues.  It was very well done because it was probably produced by Robert Redford’s production people.  It was his Institute, after all, and his pictures were all over the walls.

The most memorable part of the video was a scene of a pathetic looking young boy from the country of India walking barefoot and wearing rags, walking along a dirt road.  Huge dump trucks were blazing by, kicking up dust and stones and spewing pollution.  A deep, ominous voice announces (paraphrasing):  “If you think a billion impoverished Indians is bad, then a billion affluent Indians would be a disaster!”

Human beings are the enemy, in other words, especially “affluent” human beings.  The message of the video was that the solution to this “problem” is twofold:  First, eliminate as many human beings as possible; and second, destroy economic growth and prosperity and return us all to the good ole stone age standard of living.

This has been the primary agenda of the eugenisist American Left for at least the past century, and they have elected as president a senile old pervert and criminal to throw their Hail Mary pass for them.

“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.

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.