Covid19: None Dare Call This Murder

The following from LewRockwell.com, presents the theory that Covid19 is a man-made pathogen loosed upon the world to advance the creation of a global empire under which the mass of humanity will be reduced to brainwashed helotry under the ruthless exploitation and control of a plutocratic elite. The theory is plausible. What makes it difficult to evaluate is the difficulty in distinguishing between a government-orchestrated conspiracy and a government balls-up due to a combination of the mundane corruption and sheer incompetence that characterizes most government activity.

By Bill Sardi

Lew Rockwell.com, September 15, 2020: 

The spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus is not a pandemic, it is the biggest crime in human history, since Cain killed Abel and reduced the human population by a quarter.   And there is no world police force to stop this ongoing felony.  At least not yet.

The intentional spread of a man-mutated coronavirus has a covert objective – – to involve the entire world in an exercise through panic and fear to “cultivate a sense of global community.”  It is what the globalists call the Great Reset.

Ruthlessness

The globalists will let nothing stand in the way of their objectives, to eradicate borders, erase history and culture, antiquate and replace religion via technology (immortality via AI), eliminate free enterprise, and destroy the economies of the world and individual livelihoods in order to coerce the world to beg for relief, for vaccines and a global currency, via a single world governance led by arrogant unelected elites whose godless technocratic, transhuman world view will be forced on 7.8 billion souls, or else you or your kids will be taken to quarantine camps.

So quickly the fear of God has been replaced by the instilled fear of COVID.  What is so unexpected is the almost universal voluntary compliance with this out-in-the-open overthrow of modern society operating under the banner of equality.  The masses have largely volunteered to comply.

Fooled by the equity card

Now the poorest people in the world will have an equity card that will give them use of a digital currency that is equal in value to all other world currencies.

Take a gander at the value of various world currencies: the

Indian rupee: worth 1.3-cents
Japanese yen – 9/10ths of a penny
Argentine peso 1.3-cents
Mexican peso 4.6-cents
Kuwaiti dinar $3.26;
Chinese renminbi 14.6-cents.

These currency values are determined on a floating rate by demand.  Low demand = low value.  If a buyer wants to purchase $100 US dollars of pencils from Mexico that would equal 2,133.4 pesos.  The differences in these values are called exchange rates.

Currently the world uses the US dollar as the exchange rate for all foreign transactions, making the US dollar by practice the most in demand.

In the name of financial equality, the Constitution was trashed

With a global currency every currency would be equal.  The value of the US dollar would decline in foreign trade.  Imported goods would cost more.  With the new global currency everybody will be playing with the same money value.  Sounds great, doesn’t it?

Then international companies can do business without having to convert currencies into dollars and a guy in India can directly buy something made in Canada without having to do a wire transfer.

Robotics will be ushered in

As robotics takes over, a guaranteed income will likely follow, since that is the way to totally control the world.  But then Gross Domestic Product is a measure of welfare, not productivity.  People will learn not to work or just pretend to work.  The AI-driven robots will do all the repetitive work cheaper than any human labor.  Then the US doesn’t need to export its jobs to China any longer.  But robots only make unemployment worse, not better.

Generational naivety

The generation of people who are most attracted to this scheme, particularly the poor who can only hope a lottery ticket will bring them out of poverty, never heard Sir Winston Churchill say this:

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of its blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.”

It was Ronald Reagan in 1967 who said at his inaugural address: “Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

Parents in America naively sent their high school graduates to universities that teach Marxist socialism.  Bernie Sanders became their hero, their only hope.  Young students can’t see they have been groomed.

Now there will be no hope of rising up out of poverty.  You won’t be abjectly poor, your overseers will provide subsistence, but no freedom, no opportunity.  You become a slave, never an entrepreneur.  The US Constitution will soon be considered a relic.

When TV does the thinking for people

The world is so slow to catch on.  That is because the conscience of the world, the script by which mankind operates, is being provided by the news media.  It is the global news media that is filling in the blanks for the confused, the global news media that ridicules those who resist vaccination, that does the bidding for the banksters who are at the center of this confusion.

By social distancing, wearing masks, locking down indoors, the populations of the world will feel the “same connectedness,” so we are told.

People don’t know what to think of this.  It is beyond their comprehension.  They let the TV news reporters do the thinking for them.  It’s about a virus, right?  No!

Burning down the political opposition

No one can imagine the fires that were lit in rural Australia and California were targeted to burn down the political opposition and drive human populations into metropolises where their minds are more easily controlled.

Some say these fires were started by directed energy weapons.  The complete devastation of the burned homes in these fires without burnt surroundings was unusual.  Fires burned the California forest in swathes, like an aimed weapon.  California is broke.  Unlike countries that can print more money, states cannot.  Fires force insurance companies to release funds to rebuild, raising employment and property values.

Turn the masses against each other

Turning humans against each other by exploiting racial divides keeps the masses from mounting a push-back against the real instigators of this crime – – the intelligentsia in Europe and the billionaire oligarchs that operate above the law and agencies within US government as well as NGOs (non-government orgs) like the UN that wants to bring down democracy and free enterprise, agencies that despise free market competition, a platform that ironically earned oligarchs billions.

Read more

RELATED: 

British Medical Journal
Cloth masks increased risk of influenza like illness in hospital study

 

Kit Knightly:

Federal Judge Rules Pennsylvania Lockdown “Unconstitutional”

The Covid Conundrum: Rising Positive Test Numbers, Declining Mortality Rates

After peaking in April, at about 5500 per day, reported Covid infections in Britain fell to around 150 a day in July before rising sharply to a total this month of around 3500 per day. However, reported Covid deaths, which also peaked in April at a rate of more than 1000 per day, have fallen continuously amounting now to only about 15 a day. Thus the mortality rate for Covid19 appears to have dropped from around 18% in the spring to only 0.4% now, an almost 50-fold reduction. Why? That is the Covid Conundrum.

Possible explanations include:

1. Viral evolution to a less deadly form.

Evidence? None.

2. More testing.

Evidence? We can assume that the UK government has been cranking up Covid testing programs throughout the epidemic, so this explanation is credible. If, as appears to have been the case, initial testing was largely confined to Covid cases, i.e., people so ill with Covid-like symptoms that they came to medical attention, then early test results would have yielded a vast under-estimate of the population-wide Covid infection rate, assuming, as is now generally accepted, that many Covid infections do not cause serious illness and are often asymptomatic.

3. Better Covid treatment.

Evidence? There are many reports of positive effects of various drugs including the cheap and plentiful hydroxychloroquine, as touted by President Trump, and of the protective effects of Vitamin D and zinc supplements. Meantime, the early reliance on ventilators in the treatment of severe cases seems to have been largely abandoned as ineffective.

4. As a result of increased public awareness of individual risk factor a change in the distribution of Covid infections among population groups differing in risk of Covid mortality by virtue of age or pre-existent conditions.

Evidence? While quantitative data are scarce if they exist, at all, such behavioral changes have surely occurred as knowledge of the risk factors for serious Covid illness have become known. Older people and those with pre-disposing health conditions will have become more careful to limit their risk of infection, whereas most young people will have become more care-free concerning the virus.

Of these four factors, the last, spontaneous behavioral adaptation may be important, but there can be little doubt that changes in Covid testing methods and the expansion of testing programs mean that test data from different periods during the epidemic are not comparable. Moreover, the reliability of many test methods, especially those used early in the epidemic, is questionable. Whether the virus has mutated to a more benign form is possible but unknown.

Pretty certainly, therefore, the decline in Covid mortality in most Northern hemisphere countries indicates the achievement of a rising degree of population immunity combined with the well-established seasonality in Corona virus susceptibility, whereas the rise in reported infections is a consequence of increased testing and an increase in the proportion of the population who are either asymptomatic Covid carriers or those who have recoveved from Covid infection but still carry the virus. The Covid conundrum is thus simply an artifact of Covid testing.

Related:
Wei Li, et al.
High potency of a bivalent human VH domain in SARS-CoV-2 animal models
PETER HITCHENS: How the Government is wading into the swamp of despotism – one muzzle at a time
PAUL JOSEPH WATSON: Author Of Dystopian Classics Predicted 'Use Of Face Masks To Enforce Conformity' 70 Years Ago
MISES INSTITUTE: It's Far Too Late to Think Lockdowns Can Make Covid-19 Go Away
VERNON COLEMAN: The Coronavirus Pandemic That Never Was
Viral Issue Crucial Update Sept 8th: the Science, Logic and Data Explained:

Covid Lies to Keep You Terrorized

Absent strong public health measures, we would expect it to kill something like 0.5% to 1.0% of a nation’s population, and whether or not that’s a large number is a matter of personal opinion.

So declared Ron Unz, publisher of the Unz Review. 

That claim is far from the truth as the case of Sweden demonstrates. There, in the absence of "strong public health measures" there have been 5,846 reported Covid deaths, or about 0.06% of the population. That must be close to the final toll, as Covid deaths in Sweden peaked in March and are now at or close to zero.

Why would a scientifically literate person such as Ron Unz make such a false claim? Mere confusion, perhaps*.

One way in which Covid death rates have been greatly exaggerated has been to confuse, deliberately or otherwise, two measures of the death rate; namely, the "Case Fatality Rate" and the  "Infection Fatality Rate." 

The Covid19 Case Fatality Rate (CFR) is a measure of deaths among confirmed Covid19 cases, the latter being mainly cases of serious illness, which thus came to the attention of the medical profession and were identified as due to Covid19 by a more or less reliable diagnostic methods.

The Covid19 Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) is a measure of deaths among all those infected with Covid19, whether they were seriously ill or not, or whether they were ill at all. The IFR can only be determined if there is population-wide testing for past or present Covid19 infection, for example by means of a reliable serological test for Covid19 antibodies. 

Evidence currently available suggests that the the IFR is only about one tenth of the CFR. Therefore, to mistake the CFR for the IFR will result in an exaggeration of the actual IFR by a factor of around ten. 

But even a ten-fold error does not explain Ron Unz's claim that "absent strong public health measures" Covid19 will "kill something like 0.5% to 1.0% of a nation’s population." To explain that, assuming it is not a straight lie, one must assume that Ron Unz confuses the Infection Fatality Rate with the Population Fatality Rate (PFR). Such confusion assumes a Covid death rate among the population as a whole equal to the Covid death rate among those made sick by a confirmed Covid19 infection, which is nonsense.

But perhaps Ron Unz's claim is a straight lie, which would be consistent with the fact that, when I pointed out the error on his Unz Review post, my comment was deleted.

______
* Cf. Ronald B. Brown, 2000, Public Health Lessons Learned from Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation.

Related:
Zero Hedge: "It's Like Using A Hammer To Kill A Fly" - Architect Of Sweden's COVID-19 Anti-Lockdown Strategy Finally Vindicated

If you are scared of Covid19, read this

 If you are scared of Covid19, you should read the OffGuardian article, Flu Is Killing More People Than Covid, and Has Been for Months,  that I linked to in my last post. But in case you can't be bothered, here's the key point:

The top lines, solid blue and dashed grey, show respectively, all UK deaths in 2020, and the average number of deaths for the past five years. The rise in the blue line (i.e., the 2020 total death rate), beginning in March, peaking in April and returning to the long-term average in May, shows that over a period of about six weeks there was an abnormal rise in weekly deaths, the excess averaging about 5000 per week for a total excess mortality of, roughly, 30,000 — most likely due to Covid19 infection of  elderly people with other conditions, mostly in poorly managed care homes.

The lower lines show weekly deaths attributed to flu and pneumonia (blue lines dashed and solid) and Covid19 (red line). The peak in Covid19 deaths corresponds with, and accounts for, the peak in all deaths during the March–May period. Thereafter, the Covid death toll falls continuously, approaching zero by the end of July whereas flu and pneumonia deaths continue at what, by the end of August, is a rate many times that of Covid19. Thus, as Kit Knightly, the author of the excellent Off Guardian piece I am quoting states:

“Ah”, some of your may be saying, “this is just evidence that the lockdown, social distancing and masks have worked.”

But that is obviously not the case. Clearly, if these measures did anything to halt viral transmission, the flu deaths would have gone down as well. They have not. They are right in line with the five-year average.

Despite social distancing and wearing masks and hand sanitizer on every corner…the spread of the flu virus has not halted one bit in its usual annual progress through society.

Ergo – the “emergency measures” have little to no impact on viral transmission.

So much for those who keep saying this is not the seasonal flu. Well actually they are correct. It is now less deadly. Which will not, of course, deter the psychopaths in charge from continuing to terrorize the population with Covid fear mongering, while destroying large parts of the economy to the benefit of the big boys such as Amazon, Walmart and the chain stores that will gain greatly from the bankruptcy of many of their small business competitors. 

Covid Induced Madness: First Case Confirmed

 The British Government, under the Premiership of recently recovered Covid19 victim, Boris Johnson, has embarked on a program to conduct up to ten million Covid tests a day at a cost of £100 billion, or $130 billion US, which is almost as much as the Government currently spends annually on Britain's gargantuan National Health Service. 

This is so weird that I for a moment suspected that the date on the British Medical Journal article reporting this extraordinary Government decision must be April 1. But no, the article clearly bears yesterday's date: September 9. 

As further proof, if any were needed, that the British Government is headed by a dangerous madman is the report that as of next Monday, September 14, social gatherings of more than six people are to be banned in England, the penalty for breach of this law starting at £100, and doubling with each subsequent offenses to a maximum of £3200.

All this to control an illness that is now reported to be killing fewer people than flu, and which the Swedes shrugged off with no worse consequences than locked-down, panic-stricken places such as Britain and America. 

Yes, poor old BoJo is clearly a case of Covid-induced insanity. The sooner the Brits gather what collective wits they yet possess and boot the old fool out, the better it will be for them. 

Related:

Hancock’s Half-Hour: the Case of the Covid Positive Seagull on Brighton beach

The Systemic Racism of the Government of Canada

 

Ottawa rolls out $200 million program to boost Black entrepreneurship

"The government will kick in nearly $93 million over the four years."

So our wonderful anti-raciss government is to bilk taxpayers to fund a program that favors a particular racial group. Maybe that's a good thing, but what's certain is that it is a manifestation of systemic Liberal racism. 

CF:

Atlantic Monthly:
The Dictionary Definition of Racism Has to Change

racism “is a system of advantage based on skin color.” 

Exactly, as in, no money under this government program for people who are white, red, yellow or green with pink stripes.

Covid19: Some Random Links

University of Waterloo professor calls pandemic 'COVID fake emergency

Yikes: New York Times Estimates 90% of ‘Positive’ COVID Test Results Really Are Negative!

Gates-backed Covid vaccine causes severe adverse reaction in 20% of human test subjects

Coronavirus: Oxford University vaccine trial paused after participant falls ill

But fortunately:

Vitamin calcifediol (Vitamin D) cut ICU admission of Covid patients from 50% to 2%

And if you take 1000 units of Vitamin D every day before you get Covid19 then you may not even have to go to hospital.

And: 

Adding 50 mg of Zinc once a week could further improve your chances;

Furthermore:

Hydroxychloroquine Reduces Risk Of Death From COVID-19 By 30%, Latest Italian Study Shows

But in any case, try not to worry:

Study by Researchers at UCLA and Stanford Finds Coronavirus “Ten Times Less Fatal than First Thought” (Video)

But for goodness sake:
Don't sing happy birthday

And Some Weird Stuff:

Pharmaceutical Company Filed For Patent Application 9 Months Before Emergence of Covid 19

World Bank: Covid 19 Test Kits Were Ordered in 2017 – The Disease Did Not Exist….. Yet

Covid-19 or Covid-9-11?

And to end on a cheerful note:

Flu is killing more people than Covid19, and has been for months

Inflation, consumer prices, house prices, stock prices and gold

The following are titles of recent articles appearing at Zero Hedge:

5 Reasons The Fed's New Policy Won't Create Inflation

and

Inflation - Running Out Of Road

The first contends that however much money the US Federal Reserve prints it will not succeed in creating a substantial rise in the consumer price index. The second asserts that far from there being no price inflation, an honest consumer price index would show inflation running at an annual rate of 10%.

So how to resolve the contradiction? First, it is necessary to be clear as to what inflation is. As Milton Friedman put it shortly:

Inflation is a monetary phenomenon -- always. 

This of course was not an original insight. Adam Smith wrote at length of the process whereby monetary inflation was achieved by re-minting gold and silver coinage in increased quantities through the addition of base metal.

But the supply of money is not unrelated to prices. As Samuel Johnson observed in 1775, during a visit to the Western Isles of Scotland, eggs were a half-pence a dozen not because eggs were abundant but because pence were scarce.

But the effect of monetary inflation on prices is not necessarily uniform. Thus, inflation does not necessarily affect the consumer price index directly or even at all. In Western economies today, money is chiefly created by banks, central or private, that create money out of thin air by making loans.

These loans are, in the case of the commercial banks, made primarily to facilitate the purchase of big-ticket items, particularly houses and cars, to support speculative stock investments, or to allow corporate stock buy-backs.

Such lending has little effect on the consumer price index, since it does nothing to increase consumption of items, the price of which determine the level of the price index.

Rather, mortgage debt and car loans will tend to suppress the consumer price index by forcing borrowers to divert an increased share of income to interest and capital repayments.

What such loans do affect is the price of houses, cars and stocks that are bid up by the loan-based spending. Thus, if we want to gauge the effect of monetary inflation on prices, we need to look at home prices and stock prices as well as the prices of bread or milk. 

When we take that broader view, we see that the US and many other countries are in the midst of a rapid money-printing-induced price inflation, which greatly enriches the already rich, i.e., the owners of stocks and real estate, while making the poor, relatively speaking, much poorer.

As for gold, the price reflects fear of the consequences of monetary inflation--which is to say fear of the loss of purchasing power of the unit of currency--among those with money but no desire to invest it in stocks or real estate.

Angelo M. Codevilla: The Finger in the Dike Election

Claremont Review of books: On September 11, 2020: United Airlines Flight 93’s passengers defied armed hijackers and fought to take over the cockpit regardless of danger or odds because they realized that certain death was the alternative. Michael Anton’s 2016 essay “The Flight 93 Election,” written for the Claremont Review of Books and later expanded into a book, argued that although Americans did not know what kind of president Donald Trump would be, they should risk all to elect him because they could be very sure that the alternative would be our republic’s death.

In his new book, The Stakes: America at the Point of No Return, Anton, now a lecturer and research fellow at Hillsdale College, again urges Americans to vote for Trump, disappointed though they may be with his performance, because they know even better than before how much this country’s ruling class would use control of the presidency to hurt us in our private and public lives for having dared to reject their mastery. Trump, imperfect as he is, is like a finger in a dike that, if removed, would loose a deluge. Anton describes how the Democratic Party-led complex of public-private power has been transforming our free, decent, and prosperous country into its opposite—and how it’s going to do to the rest of America what it has already largely accomplished in California. In the book’s final chapters, he lays out several paths that the current struggle for America’s future might take.

Anton’s commentary on the 2020 election does not belabor the obvious: it is a binary choice. The unprecedented level of opposition President Trump has faced explains, but does not excuse, some of his shortcomings. As Anton puts it: “[t]here’s little wrong with President Trump that more Trump couldn’t solve.” Then he adds what is really radically new about the 2020 election: should the Democrats win, the ruling Left—which includes just about everyone who controls American government and society’s commanding heights—is ready, willing, and eager to implement plans that would make it virtually impossible for conservatives ever to win national elections again. These plans include the importation and counting of non-citizen voters. Elections-by-mail would shift power from voters to those who count the votes, just like in Venezuela. Though reelecting Trump makes the republic’s survival possible, and preserves all manner of good options, it guarantees nothing. Trump’s defeat guarantees disaster—like in 2016, only much more so.

Read more

Related: 

Paul Joseph Watson

Prof: If Dems Win In 2020, It Would Be "Virtually Impossible For Conservatives Ever To Win Again"

Craig Murray on Belarus, Diplomacy and Color Revolutions

There is a misperception in western media that Lukashenko is Putin’s man. That is not true; Putin views him as an exasperating and rather dim legacy. There is also a misperception in the west that Lukashenko really lost the recent election. That is not true. He almost certainly won, though the margin is much exaggerated by the official result. Minsk is not Belarus, just as London is not the UK. Most of Belarus is pretty backward and heavily influenced by the state machinery. Dictators have all kinds of means at their disposal to make themselves popular. That is why the odd election or plebiscite does not mean that somebody is not a dictator. Lukashenko is a dictator, as I have been saying for nigh on twenty years.

My analysis is that Lukashenko probably won handily, with over 60% of the vote. But it was by no means a free and fair election. The media is heavily biased (remember you can also say that of the UK), and the weak opposition candidate was only there because, one way or the other, all the important opposition figures are prevented from standing.

The West is trying to engineer popular opinion in Belarus towards a “colour revolution”, fairly obviously. But they are on a sticky wicket. Western Ukraine was genuinely enthusiastic to move towards the west and the EU, in the hope of attaining a consumer lifestyle. Outside of central Minsk, there is very little such sentiment in Belarus. Most important of all, Belarus means “White Russia”, and the White Russians very strongly identify themselves as culturally Russian. We will not see a colour revolution in Belarus. The West is trying, however.

Unlike many of my readers, I see nothing outrageous in this. Attempting to influence the political direction of another country to your favour is a key aim of diplomacy, and always has been. ...

Read more

Also by Craig Murray:

Novichok, Navalny, Nordstream, Nonsense

Why Fukuyama was right all along

By Aris Roussinos

Unherd, September 1, 2020: The American political philosopher Francis Fukuyama has become, perhaps unfairly, something of a punchline in recent years. Written immediately after the fall of the Soviet Union, when global pre-eminence was unexpectedly thrust upon the United States, his National Interest essay The End of History?, later elaborated into a bestselling book, has become a shorthand for liberal hubris. Its central argument, that liberal democracy had essentially won the battle of ideologies and that the arc of history seemed to bend inexorably towards the liberal order, seemed to embody the triumphalist optimism of the 1990s and 2000s, establishing the framework for the politics of the era.

Now that history has returned with the vengeance of the long-dismissed, few analyses of our present moment are complete without a ritual mockery of Fukuyama’s seemingly naive assumptions. The also-rans of the 1990s, Samuel P. Huntington’s The Clash of Civilisations thesis and Robert D. Kaplan’s The Coming Anarchy, which predicted a paradigm of growing disorder, tribalism and the breakdown of state authority, now seem more immediately prescient than Fukuyama’s offering.

Yet nearly thirty years later, reading what Fukuyama actually wrote as opposed to the dismissive précis of his ideas, we see that he was right all along. Where Huntington and Kaplan predicted the threat to the Western liberal order coming from outside its cultural borders, Fukuyama discerned the weak points from within, predicting, with startling accuracy, our current moment.

Read more

In the Interests of Better Race Relations

Image Source

Employee Fired for Exposing the Fraudulence US Nuke Lab Anti-White Propaganda

It will be interesting to see how soon U-Tube takes this video down.

Related:
'br. Fox News:

Trump ends 'critical race theory' training for federal employees, calls it a 'sickness'

Breitbart:
Google Insider: Bombshell Book ‘Deleted’ Will ‘Shake the Foundations of Silicon Valley’
Zero Hedge:
Sandia Labs Goes Nuclear On Employee Who Sparked Internal Revolt Over Critical Race Theory

Covid19: A Mechanism to Drive New World Order Tyranny?

By Brandon Smith

AltMarket.com, August 26, 2020: All over the Western world ever since 9/11 there have been incremental steps towards what many liberty advocates would call a “police state”; a system in which governments are no longer restricted by the boundaries of civil liberties and are given the power to do just about anything they want in the name of public safety. The use of “the law” as a tool for injecting tyranny into a culture is the first tactic of all totalitarians.

The idea is that by simply writing government criminality into the law books, that criminality somehow becomes justified by virtue of legal recognition. It's all very circular. Whenever government abuse of the people is initiated, it's always initiated in the name of what's “best for society as a whole”. To save society, the individuals that make up a society must be sublimated or destroyed. This mentality is the complete opposite of what the Founding Fathers in America fought and died for, but as Thomas Jefferson once said:

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”

In countries like Australia, which claim to value Western democratic principles of liberty and rule by the people, the perception is that civil rights are codified into the legal framework just as they are in the US. However, there are some glaring differences and issues; specifically, Australian citizens (like many European citizens) have absolutely no means to compel their government or the elites that influence their government to limit themselves. It is these nations, in which the populations have been mostly disarmed and pacified, that any agenda for tyranny will first be established. But we will get to that in a moment...

In Canada, What's the Difference Between a Liberal and a Conservative: Nothing Really

A Statement by Maxime Bernier, Leader of Canada's People's Party:

Two years ago, I resigned from the Conservative Party of Canada and decided to launch a new, principled, and genuinely conservative party, the People’s Party of Canada. I am more convinced than ever that I made the right decision. I said at the time that under Andrew Scheer’s leadership, the Conservative Party had become too morally and intellectually corrupt to be reformed. Instead of articulating a coherent conservative vision, all he did was play identity politics, pander to ethnic and interest groups, and try to steal votes from the Liberals by proposing centre-left policies. Andrew Scheer’s leadership has proven itself to be an utter failure. The party now has a new leader who will follow the same strategy. Erin O’Toole said early in this leadership campaign that Peter Mackay would turn the Conservative Party into the “Liberal-lite Party” if he wins. He was right. What O’Toole did not say is that he, as leader, will do the same thing. Read more

As the leader of a new party without a seat in Parliament, Maxime Bernier looks like a no hoper. Except that:

(1) Bernier is a more experienced and vastly more charismatic politician than Erin O'Toole, the newly elected leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

(2) US President Donald Trump appears set for a second term during which there is every probability that he will complete America's turn from globalization. 

This raises the question: will Canadians be happy to continue under the corruptionist incompetence of liberal lefties such as Justin Trudeau and the Just departed Tory Party leader Andrew Scheer as the US rebuilds its industrial base, restores full employment, and unhesitatingly imposes tariffs on goods and services from a basically hostile and globalist Canada?

If not, the emergence of a nationalist conservative party in tune with the policies of an increasingly nationalistic US seems entirely possible. Maxime Bernier's People's Party could be that party. 

Related: 

Patrick Buchanan: 

A Most Consequential Presidency

Zero  Hedge:
"From Cotton To Congress In 1 Generation" - Black Republicans Back Trump During RNC Night 1

America: The State of the Nation

Today you can go to jail for reopening a gym that requires masks, social distancing, and constant cleansing with antiseptics. But you will not go to jail if you assemble en masse to riot, unmasked, armored with makeshift padding, umbrellas, and helmets, and you’re free to shout and spray in the faces of officers and fellow looters and rioters alike.

Source: 

National Review: The Thin Veneer Of American Civilization... Has Been Blown Away

When Big Tech Becomes the Guardian of Capitalism, Say Good-bye to the Competitive Free Market and the Hidden Hand

By Hugh Charles Smith

All those who believe the 'privatized totalitarianism' of Big Tech 'platform plantations' are 'capitalism' have been brainwashed into servitude by Big Tech's pretense of capitalism.

Though a small point, it is important to note that the author of this generally sound critique of America's present day economic organization misapplies the term capitalism. Capitalism is: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. From the definition one sees that, contrary to the author's claim, capitalism is what America has got, there being no inherent inconsistency between capitalism and monopolism, the latter being the target of the author's criticism. What America has in large part lost, is competitive free market capitalism, and I say lost, not abandoned because America never had any serious commitment to restricting monopolism. Thus, America has capitalism, but in large part it is a viciously exploitive form of capitalism. Moreover it is something totally opposed to the competitive market capitalism to which Adam Smith attributed an invisible hand that led the capitalist to act in such a way as to promote the public good: As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value, every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Today American capitalism works unimpeded by the invisible hand and thus serves, not the interests of the American people, but only to maximize the accumulation of wealth by a tiny minority at the expense of the rest of society.

What do you call an economy of monopolies without competition or any regulatory restraints? An economy of monopolies that control both the buying and selling in the markets they control? Monopolies with the power to commit legalized fraud and the profits to buy political influence? Monopolies whose black box algorithms are all-powerful but completely opaque to public scrutiny?

Call it whatever you want, but it certainly isn't Capitalism, which requires competition and market transparency to price capital, labor, risk, credit, goods, services, etc.

Black Box Monopoly is the death of Capitalism as it eliminates competition and market transparency.

The American economy is now dominated by Big Tech Black Box Monopolies, and thus what we have isn't a "free market" system (a.k.a. capitalism), it's the pretense of capitalism, a slick PR cover for the most rapacious form of exploitation.

The SillyCon Valley model is simple: achieve monopoly power by scaling the network effect and buying up hundreds of potential competitors with stock "printed" out of thin air. Once monopoly is achieved, buyers and sellers are both captive to the Big Tech monopoly: both buyers and sellers of apps, for example, must submit to the profiteering and control of the Big Tech monopoly.

Once the profits flowing from monopoly pile up, buy back the shares you "printed" to eliminate competition, boosting the wealth of insiders to the moon. Since share buybacks were once illegal, this is nothing but legalized fraud.

Despite the immense destruction these Big Tech monopolies wreak on society, the political power they purchase protects them from any limits. That their platforms now control the flow of data, including political content and adverts, is brushed aside with the usual paradoxical claims of "free markets."

Ironic, isn't it? Big Tech Black Box Monopolies claim they shouldn't be exposed to any regulation because they've destroyed competition and transparency within the letter of the law. Monopoly platforms that control the flow of data, news and narratives are privatized totalitarianism, cloaked by the pretense of capitalism.

Like all totalitarian monopolies, Big Tech now claims "you can't limit us because now you depend on us." In other words, Big Tech is now too centralized and powerful to submit to any socio-political controls.

It's a neat trick, isn't it? Enrich the super-wealthy "investor class" with your buyback-juiced stock valuations, "buying" their loyalty and political pull with these outsized gains to keep your monopoly out of reach of any public scrutiny or limits on your profiteering and privatized totalitarianism.

That our society and economy are now in thrall to privatized totalitarian Big Tech monopolies is straight out of a Philip K. Dick story in which what's perceived as real has been manipulated by those who own the means of manipulation.

We're not just debt-serfs in central-bank feudalism, we're all serfs on Big Tech's platform plantations. If you don't love your servitude with sufficient enthusiasm, Big Tech has a special place for you: the Village of the Deplatformed, a village of ghosts who have disappeared from the platform plantations and who no longer show up in search, social media, app stores, etc.

Just as the Soviets snipped those sent to the gulag out of photos, the privatized totalitarian Big Tech monopolies cut out your selfhood and your income: Deplatformed doesn't just mean you disappear from view, it also means you've been demonetized-- your ability to earn money from your own content has been eliminated.

In effect, your labor, content and selfhood have been expropriated by Big Tech's totalitarian platforms. Big Tech monopolies don't just "own" the plantation of the mind, they own the platform plantations that control what we see, buy and sell, and what the algorithms collect and sell to everyone who wants to influence what we see, buy and sell.

All those who believe the privatized totalitarianism of Big Tech platform plantations are "capitalism" have been brainwashed into servitude by Big Tech's pretense of capitalism. Just because totalitarianism and fraud are now "legal" doesn't mean they're not evil.

Source

And Now This

Maine Governor Orders Restaurant Staff 

To Wear COVID-Visors Like Dog-Cones

and this:

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Compulsory moral bioenhancement should be covert

This for the better compliance with face-mask- and dog-cone use directives.

Related: 
Digital Freedom Platform:

I hate watching videos, especially conspiracy theory videos, and especially long conspiracy theory videos, but I found this worth watching -- all one hour and fifteen minutes of it:

Plandemic Indoctrination 

Zero Hedge:
As Sweden's COVID-19 Measures Hint At Herd Immunity, US Experts Rethink Lockdown Strategies

Zero Hedge: 
Renowned EU Scientist: COVID-19 Was Engineered In China Lab, Effective Vaccine "Unlikely"

Off Guardian:
Are You Ready for the “No One Could Have Known” Routine?

Notes From the Internets: Face Masks — the New Tin Foil Hat

Wearing Face Masks Makes People Act Careless And Ignore Social Distancing, UK Study Finds

Sweden's Lead Epidemiologist: Wearing Face Masks Is "Very Dangerous"

The Sunk Cost Virus

Sweden Refuses To Mandate Face Masks As Nordic Neighbors Expand Restrictions

He's off to study PPE 

(Note to those unfamiliar with 

British parlance, PPE is an 

abbreviation for a course in 

Philosophy, Politics and 

Economics offered at the 

University of Oxford)

(Source: The Spectator)

History to 'vindicate Swedish COVID-19 strategy'

More Than a Dozen Credible Medical Studies Prove Face Masks Do Not Work Even In Hospitals!

Do Anaesthetists Need to Wear Surgical Masks in the Operating Theatre? A Literature Review with EvidenceBased Recommendations — Short answer? Best not.

The mask is the new tinfoil hat.

‘AeroNabs’ Promise Powerful, Inhalable Protection Against COVID-19

Maund: Welcome To The Global Gulag...

Bait-&-Switch: How they’ve changed the Covid conversation

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide: What Humans Have Added, Won't Just Go Away

Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration — will it kill us all?

Even among the experts, opinions differ. The climate models, which attempt to predict the evolution of a chaotic atmospheric system, will likely always be controversial, but they indicate possible outcomes such as rises in sea level that would inundate the world's most heavily populated regions, a prediction that should give one pause for thought.

Plus, there are two other important and certain outcomes.

One is that as atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration rises it progressively impairs human mental function, as demonstrated by recent research by what one must assume are highly competent researchers at Harvard University and one of America's National Laboratories.

The other is that rising atmospheric concentration plays Hell with the biosphere, with effects that include mass species extinctions and, paradoxically, a huge increase in human population as carbon dioxide stimulates agricultural crop yields.

These facts seem now to have been generally accepted, even by major oil companies, with the result that the world is now headed for a broad-ranging set of government mandated actions to slow human-caused carbon dioxide emissions with the aim of achieving zero net emissions by 2050.

Problem is, we will still be left with a hugely elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, which will still be working its effects on the world, speeding the melting of glaciers, ice sheets and frozen soils, disrupting ecosystems and still, therefore, causing havoc.

How to respond?

One might simply hope that, in the course time, the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration would gradually decline to where it was before the industrial revolution and the fossil fuel age. That, however, is a hope sadly to be disappointed. If there were any natural mechanism for lowering the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, the concentration prior to the industrial revolution would already have hit zero, all photosynthetic organisms would have died out, as would the entire animal world, dependent as it is, directly or indirectly, on photosynthetic organisms.

But, in fact, prior to the industrial revolution, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations were flat at around 270 part per million for hundreds of thousands of years. Yes, prior to the industrial revolution there would have been some sequestration of carbon dioxide, mainly by geological processes. But sequestration was evidently balanced by natural carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere resulting chiefly from volcanic eruptions. So if carbon dioxide concentrations are be reduced to something like the pre-industrial value it will be necessary for humanity to do something.

What to do?

The only answer, apparently, is CCS: carbon capture and storage.

How to capture and store carbon dioxide is a question subject to many lines of research and pilot-scale testing. Here I will consider only whether this approach to lowering atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is economically viable:

First, how much carbon dioxide are we talking about?

Well here's the math:

The surface area of the world is ca 500 million square kilometers, or five trillion square meters.

The mass of the atmosphere is just over ten metric tons per square meter, or around 500 trillion metric tons in total. Of that, the amount of carbon dioxide that, since pre-industrial times, will have been added to the atmosphere by 2050 is:

500 trillion * (600 – 270)/1,000,000 * 1.84/1.24 = 2.45 trillion tons.

That's quite a lot, but there are methods known today for sequestering atmospheric carbon dioxide that are estimated to cost less than $100 per ton. Assuming that further research and development reduces that cost by something like a factor of ten, the cost of reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration to the pre-industrial value will be around twenty-five trillion dollars, or about one quarter of the World's yearly GDP.

So, yes, adjusting the World's atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration back to normal, though costly, will be feasible, though depending on technical developments, it may take a few years.

RELATED:
CanSpeccy: 
Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part I: Carbon Dioxide Is Not a Greenhouse Gas

Towards a US-China War? The Creation of a Global Totalitarian System, A “One World Government”?

By William F. Engdahl

Global Research, August 11, 2020: If we step back from the details of daily headlines around the world and try to make sense of larger patterns, the dominant dynamic defining world geopolitics in the past three years or more is the appearance of a genuine irregular conflict between the two most formidable powers on the planet—The Peoples’ Republic of China and the United States of America. Increasingly it’s beginning to look as if some very dark global networks are orchestrating what looks to be an updated rerun of their 1939-1945 World War. Only this time the stakes are total, and aim at creation a universal global totalitarian system, what David Rockefeller once called a “one world government.” The powers that be periodically use war to gain major policy shifts.

On behalf of the Powers That Be (PTB), World War II was orchestrated by the circles of the City of London and of Wall Street to maneuver two great obstacles—Russia and Germany—to wage a war to the death against each other, in order that those Anglo-Saxon PTB could reorganize the world geopolitical chess board to their advantage. It largely succeeded, but for the small detail that after 1945, Wall Street and the Rockefeller brothers were determined that England play the junior partner to Washington. London and Washington then entered the period of their global domination known as the Cold War.

That Anglo-American global condominium ended, by design, in 1989 with the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union by 1991. Around this time, with the onset of the Bill Clinton presidency in 1992, the next phase– financial and industrial globalization– was inaugurated. With that, began the hollowing out of the industrial base of not only the United States, but also of Germany and the EU. The cheap labor outsourcing enabled by the new WTO drove wages down and destroyed one industry after the next in the industrial West after the 1990s. It was a necessary step on the path to what G.H.W. Bush in 1990 called the New World Order. The next step would be destruction of national sovereignty everywhere. Here the USA was the major obstacle.

“A little help from our friends…”

For the PTB, who owe no allegiance to nations, only to their power which is across borders, the birth of the World Trade Organization and their bringing China in as a full member in 2001 was intended as the key next step. At that point the PTB facilitated in China the greatest industrial growth by any nation in history, possibly excepting Germany from 1871-1914 and USA after 1866. WTO membership allowed Western multinationals from Apple to Nike to KFC to Ford and VW to pour billions into China to make their products at dirt-cheap wage levels for re-export to the West.

One of the great mysteries of that China growth is the fact that China was allowed to become the “workshop of the world” after 2001, first in lower-skill industries such as textiles or toys, later in pharmaceuticals and most recently in electronics assembly and production. The mystery clears up when we look at the idea that the PTB and their financial houses, using China, want to weaken strong industrial powers, especially the United States, to push their global agenda. Brzezinski often wrote that the nation state was to be eliminated, as did his patron, David Rockefeller. By allowing China to become a rival to Washington in economy and increasingly in technology, they created the means to destroy the superpower hegemony of the US.

By the onset of the Presidency of Xi Jinping in 2012, China was an economic colossus second in weight only to the United States. Clearly this could never have happened–not under the eye of the same Anglo-American old families who launched the Opium Wars after 1840 to bring China to heel and open their economy to Western financial looting–unless the Anglo-Americans had wanted it.

The same British-owned bank involved in the China opium trade, Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank (HSBC), founded by a Scotsman, Thomas Sutherland in 1865 in the then-British colony of Hong Kong, today is the largest non-Chinese bank in Hong Kong. HSBC has become so well-connected to China in recent years that it has since 2011 had as Board member and Deputy HSBC Chairman, Laura Cha. Cha was formerly Vice Chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, being the first person outside mainland China to join the Beijing Central Government of the People’s Republic of China at vice-ministerial rank. In other words the largest bank in the UK has a board member who was a member of the Chinese Communist Party and a China government official. China needed access to Western money and HSBC and other select banks such as JP MorganChase, Barclays, Goldman Sachs were clearly more than happy to assist.

“Socialism with Xi Jinping Characteristics…”

All told until 2012 when Xi took charge of the CCP in Beijing, China seemed to be willing to be a globalist “team player,” though with “Chinese characteristics.” However, in 2015 after little more than two years in office, Xi Jinping endorsed a comprehensive national industrial strategy, Made in China: 2025. China 2025 replaced an earlier Western globalist document that had been formulated with the World Bank and the USA, the China 2030 report under Robert Zoellick. That shift to a China strategy for global tech domination might well have triggered a decision by the globalist PTB that China could no longer be relied on to play by the rules of the globalists, but rather that the CCP under Xi were determined to make China the global leader in advanced industrial, AI and bio-technologies. A resurgent China nationalist global hegemony was not the idea of the New World Order gang.

China:2025 combined with Xi’s strong advocacy of the Belt Road Initiative for global infrastructure linking China by land and sea to all Eurasia and beyond, likely suggested to the globalists that the only solution to the prospect of their losing their power to a China global hegemon would ultimately be war, a war that would destroy both nationalist powers, USA AND China. This is my conclusion and there is much to suggest this is now taking place.

Tit for Tat

If so, it will most likely be far different from the military contest of World War II. The USA and most of the Western industrial economies have “conveniently” imposed the worst economic depression since the 1930’s as a bizarre response to an alleged virus originating in Wuhan and spreading to the world. Despite the fact that the death toll, even with vastly inflated statistics, is at the level of a severe annual influenza, the insistence of politicians and the corrupt WHO to impose draconian lockdown and economic disruption has crippled the remaining industrial base in the US and most of the EU.

The eruption of well-organized riots and vandalism under the banner of racial protests across the USA has brought America’s cities to a state in many cases of war zones resembling the cities of the 2013 Matt Damon and Jodie Foster film, Elysium. In this context, anti-Washington rhetoric from Beijing has taken on a sharp tone in their use of so-called “Wolf Diplomacy.”

Now after Washington closed the China Consulate in Houston and China the US Consulate in Chengdu, both sides have stepped up rhetoric. High tech companies are being banned in the US, military displays of force from the US in the South China Sea and waters near Taiwan are increasing tensions and rhetoric on both sides. The White House accuses the WHO of being an agent of Beijing, while China accuses the US of deliberately creating a deadly virus and bringing it to Wuhan. Chinese state media supports the explosion of violent protests across America under the banner of Black Lives Matter. Step-wise events are escalating dramatically. Many of the US self-styled Marxists leading the protests across US cities have ties to Beijing such as the Maoist-origin Revolutionary Communist Party, USA of Bob Avakian.

“Unrestricted Warfare”

Under these conditions, what kind of escalation is likely? In 1999 two colonels in the China PLA, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, published a book with the PLA Press titled Unrestricted Warfare. Qiao Liang was promoted to Major General in the PLA Air Force and became deputy secretary-general of the Council for National Security Policy Studies. The two updated their work in 2016. It gives a window on high-level China military strategy.

Reviewing published US military doctrine in the aftermath of the 1991 US Operation Desert Storm war against Iraq, the Chinese authors point out what they see as US over-dependence on brute military force and conventional military doctrine. They claim, “Observing, considering, and resolving problems from the point of view of technology is typical American thinking. Its advantages and disadvantages are both very apparent, just like the characters of Americans.” They add, “military threats are already often no longer the major factors affecting national security…these traditional factors are increasingly becoming more intertwined with grabbing resources, contending for markets, controlling capital, trade sanctions, and other economic factors, to the extent that they are even becoming secondary to these factors. They comprise a new pattern which threatens the political, economic and military security of a nation or nations… The two authors define the new form of warfare as, “encompassing the political, economic, diplomatic, cultural, and psychological spheres, in addition to the land, sea, air, space, and electronics spheres.”

They suggest China could use hacking into websites, targeting financial institutions, terrorism, using the media, and conducting urban warfare among the methods proposed. Recent revelations that Chinese entities pay millions in ad revenues to the New York Times and other mainstream USA media to voice China-positive views is one example. Similarly, maneuvering a Chinese national to head the US’ largest public pension fund, CalPERS, which poured billions into risky China stocks, or persuading the New York Stock Exchange to list dozens of China companies without requiring adherence to US accounting transparency increase US financial vulnerability are others.

This all suggests the form that a war between China and the US could take. It can be termed asymmetrical warfare or unrestricted war, where nothing that disrupts the enemy is off limits. Qiao has that, “the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, with nothing forbidden.” There are no Geneva Conventions.

The two Beijing authors add this irregular warfare could include assaults on the political security, economic security, cultural security, and information security of the nation. The dependence of the US economy on China supply chains for everything from basic antibiotics to militarily-vital rare earth minerals is but one domain of vulnerability.

On its side, China is vulnerable to trade sanctions, financial disruption, bioterror attacks and oil embargoes to name a few. Some have suggested the recent locust plague and African Swine Fever devastation to China’s core food supplies, was not merely an act of nature. If not, then we are likely deep into an undeclared form of US-China unrestricted warfare. Could it be that the recent extreme floods along the China Yangtze River that threaten the giant Three Gorges Dam and have flooded Wuhan and other major China cities and devastated millions of acres of key cropland was not entirely seasonal?

A full unrestricted war of China and the USA would be more than a tragedy. It could be the end of civilization as we know it. Is this what characters such as Bill Gates and his superiors are trying to bring about? Do they plan to introduce their draconian dystopian “Reset” on the ashes of such a conflict?
___________
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

America's Fake Revolutionaries

This ‘revolution’ isn’t what it looks like

We’re really witnessing a counter-revolution of the neoliberal class

By Sohrab Ahmari

The Spectator, July 4, 2020: America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary putsch. About four years ago, the sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalisation were turfed out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist options.

This deposition explains the storm of unrest battering American cities from coast to coast and making waves in Europe as well. The storm’s ferocity — the looting, the mobs, the mass lawlessness, the zealous iconoclasm, the deranged slogans like #DefundPolice — terrifies ordinary Americans. Many conservatives, especially, believe they are facing a revolution targeting the very foundations of American order.

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Maoist or Marxist revolt, even if some protagonists spout hard-leftish rhetoric. Rather, what’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the neoliberal class — academe, media, large corporations, ‘experts’, Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.

Face Masks: The Latest Phase in The Culture War

Foundation for Economic Education, August 6, 2020: Denmark boasts one of the lowest COVID-19 death rates in the world. As of August 4, the Danes have suffered 616 COVID-19 deaths, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University.

That’s less than one-third of the number of Danes who die from pneumonia or influenza in a given year.

Despite this success, Danish leaders recently found themselves on the defensive. The reason is that Danes aren’t wearing face masks, and local authorities for the most part aren’t even recommending them.

This prompted Berlingske, the country’s oldest newspaper, to complain that Danes had positioned themselves “to the right of Trump.”

Read more