Category Archives: Government

Covid ‘Not Deadly Enough’ to Justify Risk of Fast-Track Vaccines, Chris Whitty Told Government, by Will Jones

In one twelve-day period, common sense was stood completely on its head in Britain and around the world. From Will Jones at dailyskeptic.org:

COVID-19 was not dangerous enough to justify cutting short vaccine trials as the vaccine had to be “very safe”, Chris Whitty advised the Government in the early weeks of the outbreak, it has emerged.

Writing on WhatsApp on February 29th 2020, the Chief Medical Officer told Government figures: “For a disease with a low (for the sake of argument 1%) mortality a vaccine has to be very safe so the safety studies can’t be shortcut. So important for the long run.”

The estimate of 1% turned out to be an overestimate, as the infection fatality rate in Europe and the Americas was found to be 0.3-0.4%.

Chief Scientist Patrick Vallance agreed with this advice and wrote that existing drugs should be relied on instead: “Agree, existing drugs best things to try for this outbreak. Accelerate vaccine testing where we have good candidates for future, and prepare for manufacturing capacity for longer term.”

Continue reading

California Dreaming—State Metaphor for a Failing Nation, by Matthew Piepenburg

As California goes, so goes the nation? From Matthew Piepenburg at goldswitzerland.com:

Below we consider the State of California as the metaphor of a failed state as well as the failing state of the American Union, which is anything but a dream.

Metaphors

For those already familiar with my articles, interviews or even daily banter, I have an admitted affinity for metaphors and analogies, as they help draw the simple from the complex.

Toward that end, I’ve 1) compared policy makers to failed generals, 2) debt and currency bubbles to Titanics, 3) macro investing to polo matches, 4) monetary policy to drug addiction and 5) the love of bloated bond markets to toxic romances.

As for politicians and political issues, there is always the risk of partisan bias and offending those who cling to only one perspective.

Fortunately, my take on the left or the right of current politics is fairly agnostic, as I view nearly all politicos as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

Thus, as I turn my lens toward the state of California and its failed governor, I hope readers of the left or right can dispense with politics and just stick to math so that we can all get past the swamp of red vs. blue opinions and respect the objective facts of red vs. black balance sheets.

And when it comes to the State of California, she’s deeply in the red, and serves, ironically, as yet another broader yet applicable metaphor of the world economy in general and the United States in particular.

So, let’s dig in.

Continue reading

The Right to Be Let Alone: When the Government Wants to Know All Your Business, by John and Nisha Whitehead

The Census Bureau is sending out surveys that ask all sorts of questions that are none of its business. If recipients don’t fill out the forms, they can incur fines of $100 for each unanswered question. An intentionally false answer can incur a $500 fine. This is the most outrageous article you’ll read today. From John and Nisha Whitehead at rutherford.org:

“Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent.”—Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis

There was a time when the census was just a head count.

That is no longer the case.

The American Community Survey (ACS), sent to about 3.5 million homes every year, is the byproduct of a government that believes it has the right to know all of your personal business.

If you haven’t already received an ACS, it’s just a matter of time.

A far cry from the traditional census, which is limited to ascertaining the number of persons living in each dwelling, their ages and ethnicities, the ownership of the dwelling and telephone numbers, the ACS contains some of the most detailed and intrusive questions ever put forth in a census questionnaire.

At 28 pages (with an additional 16-page instruction packet), these questions concern matters that the government simply has no business knowing, including questions relating to respondents’ bathing habits, home utility costs, fertility, marital history, work commute, mortgage, and health insurance, among other highly personal and private matters.

For instance, the ACS asks how many persons live in your home, along with their names and detailed information about them such as their relationship to you, marital status, race and their physical, mental and emotional problems, etc. The survey also asks how many bedrooms and bathrooms you have in your house, along with the fuel used to heat your home, the cost of electricity, what type of mortgage you have and monthly mortgage payments, property taxes and so on.

And then the survey drills down even deeper.

The survey demands to know how many days you were sick last year, how many automobiles you own and the number of miles driven, whether you have trouble getting up the stairs, and what time you leave for work every morning, along with highly detailed inquiries about your financial affairs. And the survey demands that you violate the privacy of others by supplying the names and addresses of your friends, relatives and employer.

Continue reading

Trump’s call for building ‘Freedom Cities’ plays right into globalists’ plan for Fourth Industrial Revolution control grid, by Leo Hohmann

What’s the difference between Trump’s “Freedom Cities” and the globalists’ “Smart Cities”? Not much. From Leo Hohmann at leohohmann.com:

  • Trump pledges to build new generation of cities on federal lands, where everyone is prosperous, safe and secure with lots of police and flying cars
  • Everyone who is awake knows that all modern cities are being developed or redeveloped as ‘smart cities’
  • And what is a ‘smart city’? Maybe Trump doesn’t know, or is he just playing us?
  • Trump’s history of talking tough against globalists but then kow-towing to their demands, like he did with the vax, should give us pause.

For several years now, myself and others with an eye toward the future have been warning people to get out of the cities or risk becoming a ward of the burgeoning technocratic “beast” system.

Through their “smart city” technology and various engineered emergencies, the globalists hope to lure us into stack and pack housing where they can more easily control us with 24/7 surveillance and near total dependence on the globalist infrastructure for our jobs, transportation, food, water, healthcare, entertainment, etc. Aldous Huxley, author of the 1931 novel, A Brave New World, foresaw the end result of technocratic advances mixed with creeping centralization even back then.

Continue reading

‘Geofence’ Warrants Threaten Every Phone User’s Privacy, by Reilly Stephens

Georfence warrants also threatens every phone user’s freedom. Geofence traces your whereabouts and gives that data to the police, who can then rummage through it and decide if you were near a crime scene. If you were, they can haul you in. This obliterates the 4th Amendment warrant requirements. From Reilly Stephens at realclearwire:

The last time your phone asked you to allow this or that app access to your location data, you may have had some trepidation about how much Apple or Google know about you. You may have worried about what might come of that, or read about China’s use of the data to track anti-lockdown protesters. What you probably didn’t realize is Google has already searched your data on behalf of the federal government to see if you were involved with January 6th.

But last month, the federal district court in DC issued an opinion in the case of  one of the many defendants who stands accused of sacking the Capitol in the wake of the 2020 election.

And with it, Judge Rudolph Contreras became the first federal district judge to approve a “Geofence” warrant, endorsing a recent police innovation: searching the cell phone history of every American to check who happened to be in the area of some potential crime.

The “Geofence” in this context refers to cell phone location data collected by Google from users of its Android operating system, as well as iPhone users who use apps such as Google Maps. Location tracking can be turned off, but most users allow it for the convenience of getting directions, tracking their daily jog, or finding the nearest Chipotle. The Government’s warrant demanded location history for every Google account holder within a range of longitude and latitude roughly corresponding to the Capitol building on the afternoon of January 6, 2021, along with similar data from that morning and evening (to filter out Hill staff and security guards).

It’s not clear this information was even needed: This defendant was apprehended within the building that day, carrying knives and pepper spray, and features on various security cameras — his whereabouts are not in question. Many of his coreligionists were considerate enough to live stream their antics themselves. While tracking down every participant in what was dubbed the Beer Belly Putsch is impractical, prosecutors have not lacked for defendants, or for evidence against them. But the government nonetheless decided to resort to a level of mass surveillance without precedent in history or criminal law. This is only the second federal district judge to rule on such a warrant, and the first, in the Eastern District of Virginia, found it “invalid for lack of particularized probable cause” (though that judge declined to suppress the evidence on the basis of other Fourth Amendment loopholes created by the Supreme Court).

Continue reading

Secret Surveillance Video Dismantles January 6 Narrative, by Julie Kelly

This is a good summary of the surveillance video that’s been released so far, and it takes a lot less time to read than watching the video would take. From Julie Kelly at amgreatness.com:

Clips aired during Tucker Carlson’s show on Monday night demonstrate how the January 6 select committee doctored surveillance video.

ox News host Tucker Carlson aired the first set of previously-unseen surveillance video captured by Capitol police security cameras on January 6, 2021 that undermines several aspects of the reigning narrative about what happened that day.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) last month gave Carlson’s team “unfettered” access to 41,000 hours of footage the government kept hidden from the American public and individuals charged in the Justice Department’s unprecedented and ongoing investigation into the events of January 6. Capitol Police and the Justice Department designated the recordings as “highly sensitive” material in March 2021; the trove remains under tight protective orders and defendants must agree to strict rules before gaining access to clips entered as evidence against them.

Capitol Police turned over to the FBI roughly 14,000 hours of video covering the hours of noon and 8:00 p.m. on January 6 but the full 24-hour reel has been in the hands of House Democrats for two years—reportedly the footage that Carlson’s team was authorized to view.

Carlson exposed falsehoods that bolster key animating aspects of January 6 including the movements of Jacob Chansley; the activity of still-uncharged agitator Ray Epps; the death of Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick; alleged “reconnaissance tours” conducted by House Republicans the day before; the “escape” of Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.); and the overall deceptiveness of the January 6 Select Committee. “Taken as a whole, the video record does not support the claim that January 6 was an insurrection,” Carlson explained. “In fact, it demolishes that claim. And that’s exactly why the Democratic Party and its allies in the media prevented you from seeing it.”

Continue reading

The “Meritocracy” Was Created by and for the Progressive Ruling Class, by Ryan McMaken

The meritocracy has nothing to do with actual merit. From Ryan McMaken at mises.org:

The American Left has decided that the so-called meritocracy is a bad thing. In a typical example from the Los Angeles Times this week, Nicholas Goldberg points to a number of issues exploring how merit is not actually the key to power and riches in America:

The United States is supposed to be a meritocracy. The story goes that if you work hard and play by the rules, especially with regard to education, you can compete, rise and succeed here. . . . But Americans are realizing that’s not always the case. The playing field just isn’t level.

Goldberg claims that the much-lauded meritocracy is less about merit and more about controlling access to elite institutions. It’s hard to argue with some of this. It’s easy to see the lie behind the claims of meritocracy when we look to the very top of the artificial hierarchy. It’s likely not a mere coincidence people like George W. Bush and Al Gore—a son of a US president and a son of a US senator, respectively—went to elite Ivy League schools. All of Al Gore’s four children, and one of Bush’s, went to Harvard. To think that these seven people got into these schools because they had more “merit” than all the rejected applicants requires gargantuan levels of credulousness.

Much of the Left’s rhetoric against the meritocracy has been in the service of justifying racial preferences and standardized testing in university admissions. Defenders of the status quo have subsequently fallen all over themselves to support the supposed meritocracy of the government-university complex. For example, Victor Davis Hansen, in a meandering and unconvincing article, recently attempted to blame the United States’ repeated foreign policy failures on an alleged decline of meritocracy. Meanwhile, Alan Dershowitz insists that today’s law schools are full of mediocrities—unlike when he and his friends filled elite universities with untrammeled brilliance.

Continue reading

Doug Casey on the Rise of “Climate Brats” and Other Useful Idiots

The useful idiots are destroying their own futures. From Doug Casey at internationalman.com:

Climate activists

International Man: Webster’s Dictionary defines a useful idiot as a “naive or credulous person who can be manipulated or exploited to advance a cause or political agenda.”

Lenin is thought to have originated the phrase when referring to communist sympathizers in the West.

What is your take on this term? Is it still applicable today?

Doug Casey: Today’s make-believe democracies are overflowing with useful idiots. They latch on to one lame-brained notion after another, perhaps to give meaning to their confused and pointless lives. They’re a bit like cats chasing the red dot from their master’s laser pointer. The Ukraine, Covid, sex perversions, Trump, racism, climate change—it’s one thing after another.

Climate change is one of the central scams being promoted by the World Economic Forum as part of their Great Reset. It seems everything that comes out of the WEF—I can’t think of any exceptions — is antithetical to the traditional values of Western Civilization, prominently including free markets and personal liberty.

We’ve discussed the COVID hysteria and what looks like World War III starting in the Ukraine. But the biggest thing, with the longest legs, is climate change. Full disclosure: I believe in climate change. The climate has been changing constantly since the world came together about four and a half billion years ago. And it’ll continue to change.

The problem, however, isn’t climate change itself but the process of indoctrinating the public, especially young people, with the belief that humanity is destroying Mother Earth.

They’re given snippets of science, like the fact that the world has been generally warming since the mid-19th century. Well, sure, it has because the planet went through what’s known as the Little Ice Age from the 16th through the 19th centuries. It has cyclically been warming for the last 150 years. As a matter of fact, the world has been warming since the end of the last Great Ice Age, about 12,000 years ago.

The “global warming” people have found a great excuse for changing not just the economy but the way literally everything works. My view is that they’re basically anti-human—they actually hate and fear people. It’s why Yuval Noah Harari, the mincing court intellectual of the WEF, often refers to them as “useless eaters.” He may be right. But what’s insane is that someone like him could gain the power to make serious decisions.

Continue reading

the greatest lie told during covid, by el gato malo

What kind of threat do pandemics pose to modern societies? From el gato malo at boriquagato.substack.com:

scott atlas has made a list of the 10 biggest lies told by the misinformation ministries during covid.

you can read it HERE.

it’s a good list.

it covers spread, risk, mitigation, far fetched pharma fables, and all the other fabulism with which we have all become so unavoidably familiar.

and indeed, these were all lies told by people who either knew better or should have known better. every actual expert was sidelined and the social contagion of panic took center stage as the drama kids playing at being the science kids took the world on the greatest pseudoscientific joyride in human history. “story” overtook “science” and “epigram” shouted down “epidemiology.” 100 years of evidence based pandemic response programs were defenestrated and replaced with superstition driven diktat that “looked like doing something.”

and it has, predictably, fallen apart and is coming to be seen as the failure of nerve, failure of science, and failure of the asch conformity test that it was.

but that does not mean that it’s over.

what if embedded in all of this is perhaps one more lie?

the greatest lie.

the one lie to rule them all.

Continue reading

My Fifty Years With Daniel Ellsberg, by Seymour Hersh

A tribute to a man who was willing to go to jail to stop the Vietnam War, from Seymour Hersh at seymourhersh.substack.com:

The man who changed America

Daniel Ellsberg at a press conference in New York City, 1972.

I think it best that I begin with the end. On March 1, I and dozens of Dan’s friends and fellow activists received a two-page notice that he had been diagnosed with incurable pancreatic cancer and was refusing chemotherapy because the prognosis, even with chemo, was dire. He will be ninety-two in April.

Last November, over a Thanksgiving holiday spent with family in Berkeley, I drove a few miles to visit Dan at the home in neighboring Kensington he has shared for decades with his wife Patricia. My intent was to yack with him for a few hours about our mutual obsession, Vietnam. More than fifty years later, he was still pondering the war as a whole, and I was still trying to understand the My Lai massacre. I arrived at 10 am and we spoke without a break—no water, no coffee, no cookies—until my wife came to fetch me, and to say hello and visit with Dan and Patricia. She left, and I stayed a few more minutes with Dan, who wanted to show me his library of documents that could have gotten him a long prison term. Sometime around 6 pm—it was getting dark—Dan walked me to my car, and we continued to chat about the war and what he knew—oh, the things he knew—until I said I had to go and started the car. He then said, as he always did, “You know I love you, Sy.”

So this is a story about a tutelage that began in the summer of 1972, when Dan and I first connected. I have no memory of who called whom, but I was then at the New York Times and Dan had some inside information on White House horrors he wanted me to chase down—stuff that had not been in the Pentagon Papers. 

Continue reading