MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Writers, of all people, are now censors « Jon Rappoport’s Blog

Posted by M. C. on January 21, 2021

Beloved publishing houses? I’m sure no writer, in the last ten thousand years, has ever used that phrase.

Are the author, and the signers of this letter, down on their knees, looking for their own book deals?

Since the invention of language, writers have fought to win the freedom to WRITE without interference. In the process, they’ve been arrested, charged, prosecuted, convicted, imprisoned, tortured, and murdered. That’s the history of the war.

And now this little venal band of scum—writers—wants censorship.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/01/20/writers-of-all-people-are-now-censors/

by Jon Rappoport

It had to happen.

People who call themselves WRITERS are signing a letter pressuring publishers to ban Trump, and anyone who has worked for him:

Do not publish a Trump memoir. Stay away from him.

The letter was penned by Barry Lyga. Who?

LA Times, January 15 [1]: “More than 250 authors, editors, agents, professors and others in the American literary community signed an open letter this week opposing any publisher that signs book deals with President Donald Trump or members of his administration.”

“Former DC Comics president Paul Levitz, journalist Sarah Weinman and ‘Little Fires Everywhere’ author Celeste Ng are among signatories to the letter, written by novelist Barry Lyga and titled ‘No Book Deals for Traitors’.”

“’We all love book publishing, but we have to be honest — our country is where it is in part because publishing has chased the money and notoriety of some pretty sketchy people, and has granted those same people both the imprimatur of respectability and a lot of money through sweetheart book deals,’ the letter read. ‘We affirm that participation in the administration of Donald Trump must be considered a uniquely mitigating criterion for publishing houses when considering book deals’.”

“’Consequently, we believe: No participant in an administration that caged children, performed involuntary surgeries on captive women, and scoffed at science as millions were infected with a deadly virus should be enriched by the almost rote largesse of a big book deal. And no one who incited, suborned, instigated, or otherwise supported the January 6, 2021 coup attempt should have their philosophies remunerated and disseminated through our beloved publishing houses’.”

Beloved publishing houses? I’m sure no writer, in the last ten thousand years, has ever used that phrase.

Are the author, and the signers of this letter, down on their knees, looking for their own book deals?

Since the invention of language, writers have fought to win the freedom to WRITE without interference. In the process, they’ve been arrested, charged, prosecuted, convicted, imprisoned, tortured, and murdered. That’s the history of the war.

And now this little venal band of scum—writers—wants censorship.

Here’s a chapter from that history; Giordano Bruno, 16th century Dominican friar, poet, and philosopher. For teaching a theory of reincarnation, for stating the universe was infinite, for discussing the possibility of life on other planets, on February 17, 1600 in the Campo de’ Fiori Square, “field of flowers,” the Roman Church burned him at the stake.

Yes, this happened. It wasn’t a Netflix movie. It was one stop along the way in the war for freedom.

But all right. These contemporary buffoons want to cancel Trump. Fine. Who’s next?

What about beloved Obama? I have evidence to support retroactive censorship against him. All his books, wherever they can be found, should be assembled in a great pile, in Freedom Plaza, and burned.

His publishers should demand the return of all advances and royalties, and if Obama can’t come up with the cash, a court should empower the publishers to take over his homes and sell them off.

The evidence?

The Guardian, January 9, 2017, “America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama’s reign,” by Medea Benjamin [2]:

“…in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.”

“While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries.”

“One bombing technique that President Obama championed is drone strikes. As drone-warrior-in-chief, he spread the use of drones outside the declared battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, mainly to Pakistan and Yemen. Obama authorized over 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, and automatically painted all males of military age in these regions as combatants, making them fair game for remote controlled killing.”

“President Obama has claimed that his overseas military adventures are legal under the 2001 and 2003 authorizations for the use of military force passed by Congress to go after al-Qaida. But today’s wars have little or nothing to do with those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001.”

“Given that drones account for only a small portion of the munitions dropped in the past eight years, the numbers of civilians killed by Obama’s bombs could be in the thousands. But we can’t know for sure as the administration, and the mainstream media, has been virtually silent about the civilian toll of the administration’s failed interventions.”

“In May 2013, I interrupted President Obama during his foreign policy address at the National Defense University. I had just returned from visiting the families of innocent people killed by US drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan, including the Rehman children who saw their grandmother blown to bits while in the field picking okra.”

“Speaking out on behalf of grieving families whose losses have never been acknowledged by the US government, I asked President Obama to apologize to them. As I was being dragged out, President Obama said: ‘The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to’.”

“Too bad he never did.”

If you petty little band of censors—who call yourselves writers—want to shut down Trump, then you have to go after Obama.

And then GW Bush, and Clinton, and so on. Don’t stop there.

There are lots of American politicians you can assail, going back to the 17th century.

You’re every censor who ever existed. You think you’ve got a special case in Trump. You don’t have a clue.

You don’t know anything about the history of writers.

I wouldn’t trade three dried-out yak turds for one of your books.

But those books won’t be censored. That’s how generous and consoling freedom is. I could say you should try freedom yourselves, but I know better than that.

I see who you are.

Miniature gargoyles, peddling your virtue-signaling inquisition.

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

White Supremacy: The Left’s Latest Lie – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 21, 2021

Cori Bush happens to be black. Is it, then, not ironic that a black congresswoman complains of white supremacy which, she implies, threatens black people in her district to the point that their lives need to be defended?

If that’s the case, how is it possible that Bush got elected – in this supremacist milieu – to America’s Halls of Power as a member of this nation’s highest legislative body?

The claim that white supremacy is pervasive in America is about as true as the canard that America is a racist country. Both are patently false, and Cori Bush is exhibit number one to show that.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/01/vasko-kohlmayer/white-supremacy-the-lefts-latest-lie/

By Vasko Kohlmayer

There is only one thing that mutates faster these days than the coronavirus: the driving narrative of America’s social justice movement.

It all began – if you still remember – with police brutality. In May of last year, it was police brutality that was America’s terrible ill and sin. To purge it, we had to beat the police on their heads wherever they showed up and burn cities across the land. And we also had to kneel.

Then came the charge of systemic racism. To do away with that scourge, we had to do all of the above, plus white people had to apologize for their privilege.

Next came slavery. To free ourselves from that plague, we had to do all of the above plus destroy sculptures and white people had to condemn themselves in addition to kneeling and repenting of their white privilege.

And now it is white supremacy that stains America.

Two weeks ago, the issue was hardly spoken of by the woke. Now they can hardly talk about anything else.

“The Capitol attack was White supremacy, plain and simple,” announces a recent CNN headline.

Following the infamous Capitol riot, the Left has somehow discovered that it is white supremacy that is at the root of what is wrong with this country.

On January 13, Cori Bush, the freshman congresswoman from Missouri, took to the floor of the House of Representatives and made the following statement:

“St. Louis and I rise in support of the article of impeachment against Donald J. Trump. If we fail to remove a white supremacist president who incited a white supremacist insurrection, it’s communities like Missouri’s first district that suffer the most. The 117th Congress must understand that we have a mandate to legislate in defense of black lives. The first step in that process is to root out white supremacy starting with impeaching the white supremacist-in-chief.”

Cori Bush happens to be black. Is it, then, not ironic that a black congresswoman complains of white supremacy which, she implies, threatens black people in her district to the point that their lives need to be defended?

If that’s the case, how is it possible that Bush got elected – in this supremacist milieu – to America’s Halls of Power as a member of this nation’s highest legislative body?

The claim that white supremacy is pervasive in America is about as true as the canard that America is a racist country. Both are patently false, and Cori Bush is exhibit number one to show that.

But this is not all. There is something else you may want to know about Cori Bush. On June 28 last year, Cori was one of the leaders of the unruly BLM crowd that broke through into a private street – in an act of trespassing and public disturbance – in Portland and Westmoreland Places, a neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri. One of the houses on that street belonged to Mark and Patricia McCloskey who were having dinner in their home at the time.

When the McCloskeys asked the trespassers to leave, the assembled crowd threatened to burn their house, and kill them as well as their dog.

They may well have made good on their threats had not the McCloskeys made it clear that they were armed and prepared to defend themselves. During the confrontation, Cori Bush, a progressive activist, stood outside the McCloskeys’ residence shouting  that they couldn’t “stop the revolution.”

Guess what happened in the days that followed?

It was the McCloskeys who were charged with felonies, not Cori Bush and her law-breaking compadres who threatened the besieged couple with murder.

Amazingly, this travesty occurred in the United States of America, a country where the right to self-defense used to be considered sacrosanct.

The charges against the McCloskeys were filed by Kimberly Gardner, the Circuit Attorney for the City of St. Louis. Kimberly Gardner, like Cori Bush, happens to be black.

To recap, this is what happened on June 28 in Missouri’s first congressional district: a crowd made up largely of black people trespassed on a white couple’s property and threatened them with death and destruction. After the targets showed their readiness to defend themselves, they were charged by a black Circuit Attorney. A few months later Cori Bush, one of the ringleaders, gets elected to the United States Congress and in her first speech implies that white supremacy threatens the lives of black people in her congressional district.

Does the McCloskey incident support in any way her assertion? Cori Bush should know better than anyone, since she was there herself… instigating it.

Contemplating this situation, a thought comes to mind: Bush’s claims would be comical if things were not so serious.

When insinuating that white supremacy threatens black people’s lives, Cori Bush is obviously not telling the truth. Sadly, she is not alone. The charge of white supremacy is now the rallying cry of the totalitarian Left.

This charge is about as false as that of systemic racism in the name of which they burned American cities all summer long.

The Best of Vasko Kohlmayer Vasko Kohlmayer [email] was born and grew up in former communist Czechoslovakia. He is the author of The West in Crisis: Civilizations and Their Death Drives.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Let’s Abolish Those Presidential Medals of Freedom

Posted by M. C. on January 21, 2021

The war on terror made Presidential Medals of Freedom even more shameless. Retired colonel Andrew Bacevich observed, “After 9/11, the Medal of Freedom went from being irrelevant to somewhere between whimsical and fraudulent. Any correlation with freedom as such, never more than tenuous in the first place, dissolved altogether.”

https://mises.org/wire/lets-abolish-those-presidential-medals-freedom?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=84b2ad1255-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-84b2ad1255-228343965

James Bovard

The Washington Post is outraged that Donald Trump has sullied one of Washington’s most hallowed honors—Presidential Medals of Freedom. After the White House announced plans to bestow the medals on two Republican members of Congress and a football coach, the Post thundered that “Trump just underlines his own unworthiness when he makes a mockery of the Medal of Freedom….This president cannot be trusted to hand out medals.”

The Post editorial concluded with the obligatory uplift of the season: “Thankfully, the Oval Office will soon be occupied by a president—himself a rightful recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom—who understands and will honor the traditions of the presidency.” Did Biden receive the Medal of Freedom for taking the lead in enacting the 1994 crime bill, which the New York Times reported helped spawn “the explosion of the prison population”? Did Biden receive the medal for helping Barack Obama win reelection in 2012 by telling black voters that Mitt Romney would “put you all back in chains”? No, he simply received it for being Obama’s vice president, pocketing the award shortly before Obama left office. But from the Post’s view, the fact that Biden received a Washington honorific that included the name “freedom” proves that he is honorable.

Presidential Medals of Freedom have long been far more squalid than the Washington Post recognizes—in part because the Post cheered the wars that spurred many of the most tainted awards.

President Lyndon Johnson distributed a bucket of Medals of Freedom to his Vietnam War architects and enablers, including Ellsworth Bunker, Dean Acheson, Dean Rusk, Clark Clifford, Averell Harriman, Cyrus Vance, Walt Rostow, and McGeorge Bundy. When he gave the award to Defense secretary Robert McNamara, he declared, “You have understood that while freedom depends on strength, strength itself depends on the determination of free people.” In reality, Johnson treasured McNamara for his ability to help deceive Americans about how the US was failing in Vietnam. McNamara’s lies helped vastly expand an unnecessary conflict and cost more than a million American and Vietnamese lives. The Washington Post editorial page didn’t complain about those awards, because the Post avidly supported that war. (After exiting the Pentagon, McNamara joined the Post’s board of directors.)

President Richard Nixon inherited the Vietnam War and expanded and intensified US bombing of Indochina. Nixon gave Medals of Freedom to Pentagon chief Melvin Laird (who helped shroud the war’s continuing failure) and his secretary of state, William Rogers. President Gerald Ford gave the Medal of Freedom to his secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, and his chief of staff, Donald Rumsfeld—two persons notorious for tarnishing the honor of the United States in foreign affairs. The Post didn’t denounce the Medal of Freedom for Kissinger; instead, they made the Great Deceiver a columnist.

President George H.W. Bush blanketed Medals of Freedom on top officials involved with the first Gulf War, including Norman Schwarzkopf, Colin Powell, James Baker, Dick Cheney, and Brent Scowcroft. The Post didn’t complain about those awards, because that was another war that the Post editorial page whooped up all the way.

The war on terror made Presidential Medals of Freedom even more shameless. Retired colonel Andrew Bacevich observed, “After 9/11, the Medal of Freedom went from being irrelevant to somewhere between whimsical and fraudulent. Any correlation with freedom as such, never more than tenuous in the first place, dissolved altogether.” After he deceived America into supporting an attack on Iraq in 2003, President George W. Bush conferred Medals of Freedom on his Iraq war team, including CIA chief George “Slam Dunk” Tenet, Iraq viceroy Paul Bremer, General Peter Pace, General Richard Myers, and General Tommy Franks, as well as prowar foreign lackeys such as Australian former prime minister John Howard and British former prime minister Tony Blair. The Post was outraged, because—no, wait, the Post editorial page thunderously supported that war, too.

Perhaps because Trump did not start any disastrous wars which he had to paper over with awards to failed generals, he has distributed much fewer Medals of Freedom than other recent presidents. Sports figures were among the most notable recipients, including Jerry West, Tiger Woods, Lou Holtz, and Gary Player. Like prior presidents, Trump gave the award to some of his political allies and supporters, including Representative Jim Jordan, Representative Devin Nunes, and Rush Limbaugh.

A long series of American presidents could not have done so much to trample our rights and liberties and to wreak havoc around the globe without the aid of people with neither scruples nor decency. Medals of Freedom are one of the cheapest ways for rulers to reward their lackeys. The names of many of the medal recipients look like confirmation of the famous passage from Friedrich Hayek’s chapter in The Road to Serfdom “Why the Worst Get on Top”:

Since it is the supreme leader who alone determines the ends, his instruments must have no moral convictions of their own. They must, above all, be unreservedly committed to the person of the leader; but next to this the most important thing is that they should be completely unprincipled and literally capable of everything. They must have no ideals of their own which they want to realize; no ideas about right or wrong which might interfere with the intentions of the leader….The only tastes which are satisfied are the taste for power as such and the pleasure of being obeyed and of being part of a well-functioning and immensely powerful machine to which everything else must give way.

Except for Kissinger, of course.

Presidential Medals of Freedom encourage Americans to view their personal freedom as the result of government intervention—if not as a bequest from the commander in chief. Ironically, the individual who poses the greatest potential threat to freedom has sole discretion to designate the purported best friends of freedom. The media usually provides gushing coverage of the award ceremonies, never mentioning that the arbitrary power of the Supreme Leader was why the Founding Fathers fought a revolution.

The Post editorial page was correct when it declared, “This president cannot be trusted to hand out medals.” But if Biden starts a war and scatters Presidential Medals of Freedom like cluster bombs on the war makers, the Post will be cheering all the way. In reality, no president can be trusted to designate the true champions of freedom. At a minimum, Presidential Medals of Freedom should be suspended until presidents cease acting like czars or elective dictators. If that beneficent reform occurs…don’t wait up for the next award ceremony. Author:

James Bovard

James Bovard is the author of ten books, including 2012’s Public Policy Hooligan, and 2006’s Attention Deficit Democracy. He has written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Playboy, Washington Post, and many other publications.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Merrick Garland really is anti-gun: Column

Posted by M. C. on January 20, 2021

Today the USAToday, in one of it’s guises as the Erie Times-News, is singing Garland’s praises.

The Harris…err…Biden administration plan is coming to fruition.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/05/01/merrick-garland-guns-supreme-court-second-amendment-column/83670044/

Michael E. Hammond

Supreme Court nominee had 4 chances to vote against gun rights, and he took them all.

The usual gaggle of anti-gun suspects has come out of the woodwork to attack the “gun lobby” for its opposition to any action on behalf of Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland.

Hand guns for sale in Mesa, Ariz.

Coupled with their typical protestations that their attacks on Second Amendment advocates are not attacks on the Second Amendment itself, their words are laden with half-truths and selectively culled “facts.”

But the truth is simple. Second Amendment issues have come before Garland, at least four times. He voted anti-gun every time.

In 2007, Garland was one of four judges on the District of Columbia Circuit who voted for the full court to rehear a pro-gun holding of a three-judge panel overturning Washington’s draconian gun ban in District of Columbia v. Heller.

And, yes, although Garland was joined by A. Raymond Randolph, appointed by George H.W. Bush, Garland’s vote was not merely a matter of intellectual curiosity. A comparable case, Seegars v. Gonzales, was decided differently two years earlier by an anti-gun panel of the same court. That time, Garland voted against a rehearing by the full court.

In 2000, Garland voted to allow the FBI to retain background check records well beyond the immediate destruction required by the Brady Law. I drafted the original version of the Smith Amendment that prohibits the FBI from keeping such records and taxing gun transactions that require a background check, which was in effect at the time. And, as the draftsman, I can tell you that Garland’s position was contrary to statutory law.

Finally, in 2012, Garland voted to allow prosecution (with a 30-year mandatory minimum sentence) of automatic firearms offenses without the prosecutor having to prove the accused knew the weapon was automatic, known as a showing of mens rea or a guilty mind, a requirement common in criminal law.

We know that with his anti-gun record, Garland would be the “swing vote” on the Supreme Court with respect to the 5-to-4 Heller decision and the subsequent McDonald decision that extended it. These cases recognized that the Second Amendment applied to individuals and to states.

We also know that Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer have called for reconsideration of Heller — both from the bench in the McDonald dissent and, in the case of Kagan, in a public speech. Whatever the unanimous Supreme Court rejection of a Massachusetts court ruling that upheld the state’s stun gun ban meant, it surely does not mean that these four justices have suddenly reversed their narrow reading of the Second Amendment.

If Garland were perfectly consistent with our views on every other issue, the possibility that the Supreme Court would fundamentally rip the Second Amendment from the Constitution would be enough to justify our position.

Some argue that it is somehow either a matter of precedent or a matter of “decorum” to give Garland a hearing or at least a vote, a point made last week by the conservative former senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. But in an era where the court has turned itself into a super legislature, the Senate clearly has not only the right but also the obligation to block any nominee who would further that usurpation of power.

I was general counsel to the Senate Steering Committee — the Senate’s conservative Republican caucus — during the Bork nomination. I can tell you that both Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas were crucified by the Senate. With the balance of the court at stake, Senate Democrats would have done anything they thought would be helpful (and politically doable) to stop either of the nominees.

Finally, the argument has been made recently that, on the D.C. Circuit, Garland and John Roberts voted together on 85% of the 34 cases they shared. I’m not sure that conservatives are thrilled about the prospect of another “John Roberts” on the court. Setting that aside, the fact is that a substantial majority of lower court cases revolve around narrow questions of fact and law.

Because the Supreme Court largely selects its docket, the percentage is lower with them. But even with the Supreme Court, 66% of the cases were decided by a 9-0 decision in the 2013-14 term (40% in 2014-15), and only about 15% of the outcomes were 5-4 (26% in 2014-15).

Put another way: Because not all 5-4 splits are strictly ideological, one or more conservatives voted with one or more liberals in more than 85% of Supreme Court decisions in 2013-14. Yet, despite the fact that all liberal and conservative justices agree (unanimously) up to two-thirds of the time, it is the blockbuster cases where the difference between Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia matters.

So, yes, the gun lobby will continue to support the Second Amendment and oppose the Garland nomination. And, yes, Democrats in tight Senate races in pro-gun states might want to keep this in mind.

Michael Hammond, general counsel of Gun Owners of America, is the former executive director of the Senate Steering Committee. 

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Being an Enemy of the State

Posted by M. C. on January 20, 2021

We lost the culture war that Pat Buchanan warned us about. I mean, we were slaughtered. Shut out. And so we watch helplessly as the “educators” who have such influence over our kids devise ideas like transgender story hour in elementary schools. Or “gender reveal” parties where parents often manipulate their very, very young children into “identifying” as the opposite sex. If that’s not child abuse, what is?

https://donaldjeffries.wordpress.com/2020/12/07/being-an-enemy-of-the-state/

Posted by donaldjeffries

It isn’t easy being a contrarian, to instinctively go against the grain. It certainly isn’t financially rewarding. I would love to support something about our society, or someone who has a hand in running it. But I just can’t. The corruption is so immense, and so prevalent even at the local level, that it cannot be confronted by anything less than hundreds of thousands of coordinated opponents.

This situation has always existed. Think of the very accurate old canard “You can’t fight city hall.” The difference is that now the tyranny has grown well beyond crass political rivalries or even feuds between organized crime families. The mafia and more recent offshoot intercity gangs at least have some kind of twisted code, and lines they won’t cross. The elite that rule us appear to have no such lines.

The entire world was basically shut down in March of this year, over an alleged deadly virus. There were no overt signs that something dangerous was afoot. No bodies being carted away, and death visiting every family, ala the Great Plague that wiped out so many in Europe centuries ago. Most of us personally knew no victims. And yet all were quarantined to some degree. As a few critics pointed out, you don’t quarantine healthy people. Well, not until now. Sports, movies, churches, and schools were cancelled. Millions lost their jobs. The public donned ridiculous masks and followed “social distancing” rules that have no scientific basis.

And all of this was accomplished without any country needing their police to enforce it. No troops in the streets. Without a single shot being fired. The opposition to such unprecedented state control was confined to “conspiracy theorists” on the internet. Like me. Those of us who pointed out the emperor was stark naked lost many friends, and angered close family members. Our skepticism made us second-class citizens. I was called “dangerous,” and it certainly didn’t help any potential career opportunities. My own niece deleted me on Facebook. So did some of my celebrity friends, like Candy Clark of American Graffiti and Barry Livingston from My Three Sons. Oh well, at least I know they were reading.

It’s always easier to second a popular motion, to be a well-paid “Yes” man. After all, if you’re saying the president, Congress, the Supreme Court, state and local officials, corporate America, the medical profession, the insurance profession, the educational system, the legal system, the media, and the entertainment world are all hopelessly corrupt, you’ve alienated yourself from a lot of people. You’re no fun at parties. Most people used to enjoy it when I pontificated and ranted in social gatherings, or at work. If we still had social gatherings, I wouldn’t be invited. And I would be fired pretty quickly from any job, if I simply conducted myself the way I did for 44 years, until experiencing one of the most unjust terminations imaginable. Which I am helpless to do anything about, because of that corrupt system.

Reason hasn’t prevailed in any battle since perhaps the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which established the forty hour work week, overtime, and other employee benefits Baby Boomers like me took for granted. Every war pushed for, since JFK stood up against the Military Industrial Complex during the Cuban missile crisis, has been given the green light. Well, I guess we should count that as a victory for reason as well. So sanity hasn’t won the debate since 1962. The list of losses for the people is lengthy. NAFTA, open borders immigration, coverups of every important state crime from the JFK assassination to 9/11, the Patriot Act, the NDAA, the Supreme Court upholding tyrannical asset forfeiture laws, and many others.

We are left now to fight a forced vaccination we don’t remotely need, perhaps even being forcibly chipped. Or to try to counter the creeping sprawl of “hate speech” and “hate crime” laws. To meekly mutter “I’m not a White Supremacist.” To argue for schools, businesses, churches, and cultural events to be reopened. But only with proper precautions, of course. Must keep up that “social distancing.”

We lost the culture war that Pat Buchanan warned us about. I mean, we were slaughtered. Shut out. And so we watch helplessly as the “educators” who have such influence over our kids devise ideas like transgender story hour in elementary schools. Or “gender reveal” parties where parents often manipulate their very, very young children into “identifying” as the opposite sex. If that’s not child abuse, what is?

For years, I argued that this casino economy of ours had to inevitably collapse. In my youthful idealism, I imagined something better emerging from the ruins. Now I’m much older, and have no such expectations. They appear to be able to keep this mess afloat on life support, no matter what. The fact that it hasn’t collapsed after thousands of businesses were forced to close, millions were thrown out of work, and huge parts of the economy like sports and movies were effectively cancelled, is very telling. They will just keep creating money out of thin air under their counterfeit banking system. Maybe we’ll get another $1200 check.

Our “representatives” in the Senate just voted unanimously to eliminate the cap on foreign Visa workers. That’s quite a strange thing to do during a deadly “pandemic,” and when millions of American citizens have lost their jobs due to the unconstitutional lockdown. Don’t expect a veto from Donald Trump, who of course pledged to eliminate the unnecessary foreign worker programs. Maybe we’ll get an exasperated tweet.

The people have actually been losing ever since the tyrant Lincoln crushed that whole “consent of the governed” thing. You know, the main premise behind the War for Independence. We lost every time when their laughable false flags, from “Remember the Maine” in 1898 to the “weapons of mass destruction” lie was believed by a gullible majority of the public. That’s our problem- that gullible majority. They’re the ones phoning the authorities to report “social distancing” violations, or screaming “there’s no evidence!” of voting fraud, and they will be first in line for the mandatory vaccine. They have been trained, like Pavlovian dogs, to be skeptical of the “conspiracy theorists,” not any authority figure or institution. Except Donald Trump. They have been brainwashed to hate him, like Orwell’s fake opposition leader Goldstein in 1984.

Speaking of Orwell, his dystopian world is here. What exactly is the distinction between his Thought Crime and the “woke” Left’s “hate crime?” That gullible majority again parrots the phrase “hate speech” without understanding how such a concept is incompatible with free speech. The majority of Americans now don’t believe in free speech for those they disagree with. Since that is the significance of the First Amendment, they really don’t believe in free speech. Period. And since they don’t consider a thousand or more witnesses signing sworn affidavits about electoral fraud, to be “evidence,” they don’t appear to believe in free and secure elections, either. But they hate “racism.” And they support every war.

If the Founders could see what a shocking Banana Republic we’ve become, they would be heartbroken. They didn’t secede from British rule so that society could celebrate 57 different genders. Or claim that even the poorest residents of Appalachia have some kind of “White Privilege” that Black billionaires don’t. Or permit our militarized police to abuse their authority and confiscate the property of those who haven’t even been charged with a crime. Or give benefits, public schooling, job preferences, and legal favoritism to noncitizens, including those who entered the country illegally. Or spend most of the federal budget on a centralized permanent armed forces, and shadowy intelligence agencies with secret budgets.

Our “representatives” still swear allegiance to a Constitution they don’t believe in, or pay attention to. The gargantuan federal government is as far removed from what the Founding Fathers intended as a One Percenter is from a timeclock and a demanding boss. And yet, while it’s taken on a power and scope it’s not supposed to constitutionally have, it provides virtually no services in return. It just takes. And mandates.

We are like a boxer, who’s been beaten relentlessly for fourteen rounds. We’re in the fifteenth and last round, trying desperately to hold on to the ropes. The referee is openly against us, and the judges are not scoring the rounds fairly. The fans, who stand to lose if we do, are wildly cheering on our (and their) opponent. Our only hope is if those fans storm the ring and save us (and themselves).

As Orwell stated in 1984, “If there was hope, it must lie in the proles, because only there, in those swarming disregarded masses, eighty-five percent of the population of Oceania, could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated. The Party could not be overthrown from within.” We are the Proles, and we outnumber our corrupt and incompetent leaders by the millions. But if we don’t come together, that’s irrelevant.

As we enter the holiday season, that same gullible majority is embracing even more tyrannical restrictions. Cases are surging- we must cancel Christmas! It’s like we’ve gone through the looking glass- where the spirit of Ebenezer Scrooge is being celebrated.

We’re all in this together. Take your vaccines. Trust the “science.” Listen to the “fact checkers.” Embrace the “great reset” and the “new normal.” Yes, Virginia, there is a conspiracy. God bless us, everyone.

About donaldjeffries

Author of the critically acclaimed best sellers “Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover Ups in American Politics,””Survival of the Richest: How the Corruption of the Marketplace and the Disparity of Wealth Created the Greatest Conspiracy of All,” and the newly released “Crimes and Cover Ups in American Politics: 1776-1963.” Author of the 2007 sci-fi/fantasy novel “The Unreals,” which has been described as a cross between The Wizard of Oz and The Twilight Zone, and compared to A Confederacy of Dunces and classic Russian literature. A second edition of “The Unreals” was published in February 2015 by Pocol Press. Long time JFK assassination researcher. Seeker of truth, proponent of justice and fairness. Enemy of corruption. Sender of as many “tiny ripples of hope” as possible. View all posts by donaldjeffries »

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Storming Into America 3.0

Posted by M. C. on January 20, 2021

One thing you won’t see under “Woke” rule is an audit of the Federal Reserve and reform of our counterfeit fractional banking system. Or a new JFK assassination or 9/11 investigation. Or a decades overdue upgrade of our Third World infrastructure. Or an abolition of private prisons. Or a change in our misguided, Israeli-driven foreign policy. Or a demand that the intelligence agencies make their budgets public. Or spending cuts for the military industrial complex. Or demands to bring any of the troops home. And most obviously, not even a tepid debt jubilee for all those devastated by the senseless economic lockdown.

In this fantastically divided country, after the brief age of Trump, we remain locked down, wearing masks, socially distancing, listless and rudderless. Like Orwell’s Winston Smith, we have learned to love Big Brother.

https://donaldjeffries.wordpress.com/2021/01/11/storming-into-america-3-0/

Posted by donaldjeffries

I thought America 2.0- the authoritarian mess which evolved out of the 9/11 false flag- was bad. It made those of us old enough to have lived most of our lives in America 1.0 long for the days of a better looking, more competent corruption. 2020, with a deadly virus that had the beneficial effects of eliminating both the threat of terrorism and the common flu, and an unconstitutional lockdown accompanying it, was only the beginning.

2021 is off to a roaring start. First, a laughably fraudulent election in Georgia, which gave the Senate to the Democrats, and featured overt evidence like the Republican Perdue losing 30,000 votes live on air. And now, the January 6 incident at the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., which featured a terrifying unarmed mob of White riff-raff, “storming” the representative body their taxes pay for, while politely keeping between the purple ropes, taking lots of selfies, and to untrained eyes appearing to be a pretty innocuous bunch. Well, except for that dangerous fellow who dared to prop up his working class boots on Lady Nancy Pelosi’s desk.

If you believe the mainstream media, there were only 45,000 people protesting the election results on January 6. If you believe the people there, and the photo evidence, there were at least hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million. Regardless of how many there were, they came there, from all across the country, because Donald Trump and his inner circle, intimated that something “big” was going to happen. The QAnon mindset was strong here; perhaps many in attendance thought they’d witness live perp walks of the Deep State criminals they’d been told repeatedly would be arrested and convicted by a military tribunal.

Instead, Trump issued a predictable pep talk, the kind he’s perfected at countless rallies. I don’t believe he should be held accountable for “inciting” people to do the wrong thing, but he did declare that he was going to be marching with them. Not sure how that would have worked, but instead he fled back to the White House. At the first inkling of criticism, Trump threw his supporters under the bus, and called their actions “heinous.” Then he told them to “go home in peace.” I thought of all the Catholic masses that end with almost those exact words. In effect, Trump was issuing a closing statement, on the MAGA movement he started and consistently disappointed.

In the wake of the event, every media outlet and politician in both parties condemned what they invariably called a “storming” of the Capitol, and referred to the protesters as “traitors,” “terrorists,” and the like. On social media, I raised comparisons like the six block takeover last summer of Seattle, by a self-proclaimed group of insurgents, and the 1967 entrance into the Sacramento state Capitol building by an openly armed group of Black Panthers, who were not punished at all. Sadly, many good people instinctively declared there was “no comparison.” I can’t illustrate the division that exists, and the problems we face, any clearer than that. The “Woke” Left sees everything now through their own emotional bias.

The two party system was very, very bad. But we are now living under imminent One Party rule. And it’s a party that is far too similar to Big Brother’s in Orwell’s 1984. Frightening prospects exist for the common American under “Woke” party leadership. Reparations? Perhaps a ban or at least an abridgment of the First Amendment? South African-style Truth and Reconciliation committees? Open and strictly enforced quotas in all walks of life? Banning of the words “man” and “woman?” A constitutional amendment to enshrine all 57 genders as ironclad law?

One thing you won’t see under “Woke” rule is an audit of the Federal Reserve and reform of our counterfeit fractional banking system. Or a new JFK assassination or 9/11 investigation. Or a decades overdue upgrade of our Third World infrastructure. Or an abolition of private prisons. Or a change in our misguided, Israeli-driven foreign policy. Or a demand that the intelligence agencies make their budgets public. Or spending cuts for the military industrial complex. Or demands to bring any of the troops home. And most obviously, not even a tepid debt jubilee for all those devastated by the senseless economic lockdown.

Donald Trump’s legacy will ultimately be that he forever destroyed any chances of a real Third Party ever arising in this country. There will never be another populist using his revolutionary rhetoric again. Instead, his cartoon personality assures that the disastrous two party duopoly is now set in stone. Except it’s even worse than that, since the Stupid Party has ceded all power to the Evil Party, we will be completely under the rule of “Woke” tyrants, but for token clowns like Lindsay Graham, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and Nikki Haley. The Stupid Party is dead, long live the Stupid Party!

Trump will not run in 2024. He many not legally be able to, because Lady Pelosi and company want to either invoke the 25th amendment, or ram through a warp speed impeachment, ironically mimicking Trump’s unwise push for a potentially deadly dose of something his loyal base strongly opposes. Trump has now been apparently banned for life from Twitter, at the initial behest of former First Lady Michelle Obama, who has an all too bright political future in our “Woke” Orwellian world. For someone who communicated exclusively through Twitter, this is a bitter pill for Trump to swallow. One pictures him tapping aimlessly away on his keyboard, while shoving down Big Macs and Diet Cokes.

Our only chance is that the AOC-types, the “Squad,” wind up embroiled in ugly disagreements with the old “Woke” guard like Pelosi, Schumer, and pseudo-President Biden. Maybe they can distract each other enough to prevent the worst measures from being implemented. Gridlock has always been our best friend on Capitol Hill. The odds of any of these glorified welfare recipients ever doing something good is so remote that their inactivity is the best we can hope for. Our new leaders may be diverse in appearance, but they certainly aren’t diverse in perspective. They will all support war, engage in corruption, and follow orders.

Rumors are that people who merely attended the rally on the Mall last Wednesday have been fired from their jobs. Well, no one protested when all those people were fired last year, for criticizing the violent riots on social media, on their own free time. AOC and others call Trump voters “complicit” in his election. That means an accessory to a crime. So Trump’s election, in their “Woke” eyes, was a crime. Maybe a “hate crime.” I would say that the logistics of attempting to punish or prosecute 70 million voters would be unfathomable, but I don’t think you can overestimate the “Wokeness” of our new leaders. They may very well make “White privilege” a crime. They may ban the word Trump from society, like one of Orwell’s unpersons.

I could not be more demoralized or disillusioned. Trump’s four years were almost entirely bereft of the “winning” he promised. “Trust the plan” seems like the most bitter joke imaginable now. The only arrests were of Trump’s associates, who were prosecuted by his Justice Department. The same Justice Department that declined to prosecute Hillary Clinton. Or look at Hunter Biden’s laptop. Or investigate vote fraud.

Trump was the commander-in-chief for four years. He could have brought all the troops home, as he often threatened to do. He could have closed the border, as he often threatened to do. He could have written those Executive Orders he promised, to ban DACA, ban birth-right citizenship, close sanctuary cities, and end the foreign VISA worker programs. Instead, while he undeniably was preoccupied with fending off attacks for his entire time in office, including a laughably partisan impeachment effort, he spent most of his time in office tweeting. And engaging in childish food fights with state-controlled journalists and clueless celebrities. The level of discourse is now less civil than it has ever been.

Trump’s rhetoric alone, however, puts him apart from all presidents since JFK. The things he alluded to, or casually mentioned, were outside the pale. No respectable politician would ever touch them. It was Trump’s rhetoric at his wildly enthusiastic rallies, and his attacks on the establishment via Twitter, that caused that establishment to hate him like no other public figure in our history. Trump Derangement Syndrome is far more real than any Soviet-style invented mental illness. So many of my former friends, good people all, have fallen victim to it. They hate him irrationally, and they will not listen to reason on the subject.

I don’t know where we go from here, or even where the scripted Punch and Judy show goes. If Trump isn’t impeached or taken out by the 25th amendment, he’ll be 78 years old in 2024. He has almost superhuman energy for someone his age, but sooner or later it will catch up with him. And I think his support has peaked. A certain number of those even at the rally have to be disappointed, in falling for the “big” event on the 6th, many traveling from far flung parts of the country (as did Ashli Babbitt, who was murdered by a cop at the Capitol), only to be unceremoniously rejected and told to go home by their leader.

Beyond Trump, the Stupid Party has no one else. Trump was only elected because he never really was a Republican. Stupid Party favorites like Nikki Haley and Paul Ryan are literally empty suits, standing for nothing except war and lowered corporate taxes. They would be lucky to win 20 percent of the vote in a presidential election. Because Trump didn’t deport the millions of illegals in this country, and Biden is about to grant them all amnesty, the voting demographic will shift into impossible territory for the Republicans. Trump will be the last Republican president.

The “Woke” rise to power is the culmination of decades of brain washing, on the Disney Channel and Nickelodeon, on ESPN, by Oprah and The View, and on every college campus in America. Only by diabolical, Pavlovian programming could you get perhaps a majority of the country to think that men can menstruate, and have babies. Or get young parents to hold parties celebrating their 3 or 4 year old child’s conversion to the opposite gender. That would be child abuse in any sane society. Here and now, it is being celebrated by every media outlet. You can’t fight city hall, when city hall completely controls the the airwaves.

And the internet, once the shining beacon for all of us, is standing on wobbly legs as well. Big tech is censoring virtually all opposition to the One Party. The people who support the horrific likes of Kamala Harris, and Beto O’Rourke, and Amy Klobuchar, and Pete Buttigieg, do not remotely believe in free speech. It’s a wonder they don’t burst into flames as they swear allegiance to a Constitution they not only don’t support, but sneer at as a “racist” relic. Unless more people stand up, the internet will eventually look like your average cable or satellite package of channels. Blogs like this will be banned. The last thing the “Woke” elites want is for average people to analyze public issues without filtering it all through an overpaid talking head.

I wish I could find some glimmer of hope. Some of Trump’s most faithful supporters are still believing that he is going to activate an Executive Order, or invoke the Insurrection Act. The White Hats are still making plans. It is almost literally the last hour, but maybe they have a sense of the dramatic. The Q folks are still trumpeting arrests and sealed indictments that are invisible to the public. All the biggest swamp creatures still seem to be walking free, so I’m not sure just who is being arrested. The swamp seems fuller than ever.

Trump is surrounded by those he can’t trust, we’re told. This is unquestionably true, but he appointed every single one of them. He put Never Trumper Christopher Wray in charge of the FBI. Was that even an improvement over the odious Comey? He replaced the strangely listless Jeff Sessions with Deep State Hall of Famer William Barr. What other Attorney General in our history has refused to investigate those scheming against his boss, while eagerly targeting his boss’s campaign aides, who have done nothing criminally wrong? And Trump picked Mike Pence as his running mate; another Never Trumper whose failure to stand by the president should have surprised no one.

One young Senator seems promising- Josh Hawley of Missouri. However, Simon & Schuster cancelled Hawley’s contract for a book exposing big tech and big pharma, because he spoke out in the Senate, protesting the fraudulent election. Many are calling on him to resign. This is the “cancel culture” element of the One Party, and we all either need to fight it or get used to it. Offend somebody who is “Woke,” and get fired. Instantly. Without passing “Go” or collecting $200. And no one will speak out in your defense. You should have known better- watch what you say. The Constitution doesn’t protect “hate speech.”

We haven’t been a free country for a long time. But we weren’t this bad. And we’re going to get a lot worse. We all saw what happened when a president spouting populist rhetoric, with millions of followers, attempted to expose electoral fraud, for which massive evidence exists. However, those videotapes, and over a thousand sworn affidavits amount to “no evidence!” according to every disciple of the “Woke” party. The mere mention of vote fraud gets you kicked off Twitter and You Tube, and brings the “Fact Checkers” out on Facebook. We’re like a collective battered wife, hoping that our abusive spouse will give us a smile and bind the wounds he caused. Stockholm Syndrome is too mild a word to describe American malaise.

The “Woke” supporters are calling what happened at the Capitol an “insurrection.” This event, being compared to Pearl Harbor and 9/11, will undoubtedly be used to further crack down on what’s left of our civil liberties. They want all those involved to be locked up for ten years. The more vicious social justice warriors want them executed for treason. Law means nothing when emotion, and not reason, rule those enforcing it. Politicized prosecutions should never happen. Under “Woke” rule, every prosecution, and every punishment, will be at the whim of who’s enforcing it.

I’ll keep writing this blog, and publishing books, and doing my weekly radio show, and doing interviews, for as long as they let me. I’ve been calling this a crumbling country. Or a collapsing country. We are no longer in the process of something; we have crumbled, we have collapsed. The only thing that can save us from a tyranny the likes of which the world has never seen is an uprising of many millions, in concert with each other, fighting for the same goals.

In this fantastically divided country, after the brief age of Trump, we remain locked down, wearing masks, socially distancing, listless and rudderless. Like Orwell’s Winston Smith, we have learned to love Big Brother.

About donaldjeffries

Author of the critically acclaimed best sellers “Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover Ups in American Politics,””Survival of the Richest: How the Corruption of the Marketplace and the Disparity of Wealth Created the Greatest Conspiracy of All,” and the newly released “Crimes and Cover Ups in American Politics: 1776-1963.” Author of the 2007 sci-fi/fantasy novel “The Unreals,” which has been described as a cross between The Wizard of Oz and The Twilight Zone, and compared to A Confederacy of Dunces and classic Russian literature. A second edition of “The Unreals” was published in February 2015 by Pocol Press. Long time JFK assassination researcher. Seeker of truth, proponent of justice and fairness. Enemy of corruption. Sender of as many “tiny ripples of hope” as possible. View all posts by donaldjeffries »

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook (Mark Bray)

Posted by M. C. on January 20, 2021

Oh, I’m not ruling out future violence occurring—it’s already visited on us, obviously, as part of a deliberate plan. That’s the loud-and-proud message of this book, after all. I’d be surprised if the Right isn’t forced to act defensively at some point, but most likely there will first come fracture, bringing chaos, and in that chaos, the debilities currently accompanying Right violence will fade. The sooner that fracture, whether economic collapse or some other mechanism, comes the better, because the Left is ascendant and knows its danger, and is already making swift moves to kill us all—something in which Mark Bray will no doubt eagerly participate. In short—don’t be a patsy.

https://theworthyhouse.com/2021/01/18/antifa-the-anti-fascist-handbook-mark-bray/

written by Charles

More than twenty years ago, as a very young man, I traveled in Ukraine. In one place, the local authorities were excavating a mass grave from the 1930s. Hundreds of skeletons, men and women, many with flesh and clothes still attached, had been laid out on wooden platforms, for attempted identification before reburial. If you looked, it was easy to see the cause of each person’s death—a square hole in the head. Why square? Because the Communists had hammered in a railroad spike. Why does this matter? Because what screams from every page of this book of Antifa apologetics is that the author, Mark Bray, and his compatriots, today’s direct ideological successors of those murderers, want to do the same to you.

Bray, who works as a “part-time lecturer” at Rutgers University, and who was a sometime organizer of Occupy Wall Street back in 2009, published this book in 2017. No surprise, he claims relevancy for his book based on a supposed surge in fascism due to Trump’s election. But it was only this past summer, with the rise of Antifa to prominence during the nationwide BLM-led Floyd Riots, that this book really became relevant. It is the only book-length treatment of modern organized left-wing violence directed against the Right, and although it is tendentious in the extreme, reading it is very instructive. (I bought it used, naturally, so that Bray didn’t get a cent from my purchase.) https://www.podbean.com/media/player/vxwvp-f79204?from=pb6admin&download=1&version=1&auto=0&share=1&download=1&rtl=0&fonts=Helvetica&skin=1&pfauth=&btn-skin=107 Print (PDF)

My first purpose is to understand the violence generated by Antifa. I mean not the fact of violence itself, which (and what should be the immediate response to it) is a tactical question, not difficult to understand. What I want to explore is the thought that drives that violence. And then I want to comprehend how that violence is organized, how it is funded, and how it interlocks with the broader Left ecosystem of today. Bray’s book, the goal of which is to justify the works of Antifa, not to man but to his political allies who have yet to fully publicly embrace violence, is a useful place to start this exploration, though we will have to go well beyond it.

The author begins, as we can all agree is necessary, with a definition of fascism, which he says is “difficult to pin down.” He endorses a lengthy definition offered by Robert Paxton, a historian of Vichy France: “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.” This may be a good description of 1930s and 1940s fascism, or it may not be, but no matter, since Bray never recurs to any aspect of this definition. Rather, in practice throughout the book, fascism is implicitly, and often explicitly, defined as any effective opposition to whatever the demands of the modern Left are at any given time. And the more effective opposition is, the more fascist it is.

To his credit, Bray admits this. He seems personally offended by dissembling about his real goals, yet realizes it is necessary, which gives his book a schizophrenic feel. We should reject needing a “finely-tuned” analysis of fascism, he tell us. We should understand the term is actually “a moral signifier that those struggling against a variety of oppressions have utilized to highlight the ferocity of the political foes they have faced.” The key is “solidarity with all those who suffer and struggle.” In other words, the only thing is the victory of the Left, and anyone who opposes that, is fascist.

As I say, this is a book of apologetics, directed primarily at normies. (Keith Ellison, the former Congressman who is currently the Attorney General of Minnesota, was famously photographed endorsing this book.) The chief hurdle Bray faces in this endeavor is that he completely endorses the violent silencing of all opposition to the Left, yet knows that sells poorly in normie America, and to normies, you look bad when your own supposed definition of fascism centers on how fascists “abandon democratic liberties” and use “redemptive violence,” yet both those are the core of your own self-definition. Bray wrote this book in an attempt to square this circle. He doesn’t succeed, because not even God can square a circle. The result is instead protean word salad, where Bray returns again and again to halfheartedly trying to show that Antifa is something other than merely joint action to violently suppress all opposition to the Left, and fails. Then he gives up, and admits his project.

We will step backward into history in a moment, but the Left here, by opposition to which fascism is defined, is the modern Left—just as radical as the 1930s Communist-dominated Left of the West, but having little in common with it other than its basic premises and utopian vision. The focus today is any form of supposed “oppression,” which, as the late Roger Scruton pointed out, is the bedrock of all modern leftism. Although the modern Left pays lip service to economic oppression, the almost sole focus of the 1930s hard Left, there is no actual concern whatsoever in this book for the urban “worker,” much less the rural proletariat in flyover country, or the struggling lower-middle and middle class. Despite frequent obligatory references to “the workers,” what comes through loud and clear is that Antifa, just like the modern Left as a whole, is a movement of the elite, not the proletariat. Bray uses as the meat of much of his book anecdotes and quotes taken from Antifa pseudo-soldiers around the world; none of them, as far as can be determined, is a worker in the traditional sense. Almost certainly most or all of them are upper-middle class in background and work, if they work, in some nonprofit-type job aligned with their politics. Bray is part of the fraternity, as he gladly admits, and his own background is, naturally, of this type.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

“I Am Open”: 50,000 Italian Restaurant Owners Plan to Ignore Lockdown

Posted by M. C. on January 20, 2021

https://off-guardian.org/2021/01/15/i-am-open-50000-italian-restaurant-owners-plan-to-ignore-lockdown/

Huge act of civil disobedience plans to conduct business as usual inspite of “anti-Covid” measures

Today – Friday 15th January – over 50,000 restaurants are planning to open, an act of mass civil disobedience against “anti-Covid” lockdown measures which have massively hurt the restaurant business, especially small family-owned businesses.

Spreading through social media under the hashtag #IoOpro (“I am opening”), the movement is largest country-wide act of civil disobedience since lockdowns began.

Italain opposition MP Vittorio Sgarbi has backed the movement, saying in an interview:

Open up, & don’t worry, in the end we will make them eat their fines”.

Italy’s government is already facing internal conflict and crisis, an early election is a possibility.

A similar movement already started in Mexico on January 12th, when hundreds of restaurant owners gathered to protest the lockdowns:

The “I am Open” protest is spreading across Europe as well, with variants already taking hold in German-speaking Switzerland (#Wirmachenauf) and Poland (#OtwieraMY).

It’s good to be reminded that, no matter how much it looks like the new normal is spreading unopposed, it’s not. People all over the world are resisting where they can. That’s what “Covid Positive” is all about.

To follow the progress of this movement we recommended following Robin Monotti and the It’s Time to Rise accounts on twitter and other platforms.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Why Twitter and FB must ban the NY Times

Posted by M. C. on January 20, 2021

TAKEAWAY FROM THE TIMES: The vaccine clinical trials are ONLY designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.

Therefore, the leading vaccine clinical trials are useless, irrelevant, misleading, and deceptive.

Therefore, what rational human would choose to receive the COVID vaccine?

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/01/19/why-twitter-and-fb-must-ban-the-ny-times/

by Jon Rappoport

Message to Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey: you have to ban the NY Times. Now.

I’ve got the hard evidence.

The Times, on at least three separate occasions, has published terribly corrosive information that would destroy the official COVID narrative.

Do you realize what that means? People could form a different picture of the pandemic. They could, after reading the Times, decide the situation ISN’T DANGEROUS, AND THE LOCKDOWNS AREN’T NECESSARY. THEY COULD DECIDE ONLY A FOOL WOULD LINE UP FOR THE VACCINE.

I’ll lay it all out for you, dear reader. I’m sure you’ll agree Twitter and FB must take action at once.

ONE: September 22, 2020, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know”:

“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”

“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”

“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”

“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”

TAKEAWAY FROM THE TIMES: The vaccine clinical trials are ONLY designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.

Therefore, the leading vaccine clinical trials are useless, irrelevant, misleading, and deceptive.

Therefore, what rational human would choose to receive the COVID vaccine?

TWO: On August 29, 2020, the New York Times published a long article headlined, “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.”

Its main message? “The standard [COVID PCR] tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus…Most of these people are not likely to be contagious…”

“In three sets of testing data…compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.”

“On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times. If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.”

TAKEAWAY FROM THE Times: The 90% of people tested, who “carry barely any virus,” are FALSE POSITIVES. Up to 90% of ALL people who have been labeled “COVID cases” are not COVID cases. This fact would downgrade the pandemic to “just another flu season.” And there would be no reason for lockdowns.

THREE: NY Times, January 22, 2007, “Faith in Quick Tests [PCR Tests] Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.”

“Dr. Brooke Herndon, an internist at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, could not stop coughing…By late April, other health care workers at the hospital were coughing…”

“For months, nearly everyone involved thought the medical center had had a huge whooping cough outbreak, with extensive ramifications. Nearly 1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in; 142 people, including Dr. Herndon, were told they appeared to have the disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some in intensive care.”

“Then, about eight months later, health care workers were dumbfounded to receive an e-mail message from the hospital administration informing them that the whole thing was a false alarm.”

“Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test [PCR] that led them astray.”

“There are no national data on pseudo-epidemics caused by an overreliance on such molecular tests, said Dr. Trish M. Perl, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins and past president of the Society of Health Care Epidemiologists of America. But, she said, pseudo-epidemics happen all the time. The Dartmouth case may have been one the largest, but it was by no means an exception, she said.”

“Many of the new molecular [PCR] tests are quick but technically demanding, and each laboratory may do them in its own way. These tests, called ‘home brews,’ are not commercially available, and there are no good estimates of their error rates. But their very sensitivity makes false positives likely, and when hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like there is an epidemic.”

“’You’re in a little bit of no man’s land,’ with the new molecular [PCR] tests, said Dr. Mark Perkins, an infectious disease specialist and chief scientific officer at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, a nonprofit foundation supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. ‘All bets are off on exact performance’.”

“With pertussis, she [Dr. Kretsinger, CDC] said, ‘there are probably 100 different P.C.R. protocols and methods being used throughout the country,’ and it is unclear how often any of them are accurate. ‘We have had a number of outbreaks where we believe that despite the presence of P.C.R.-positive results, the disease was not pertussis,’ Dr. Kretsinger added.”

“Dr. Cathy A. Petti, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, said the story had one clear lesson.”

“’The big message is that every lab is vulnerable to having false positives,’ Dr. Petti said. ‘No single test result is absolute and that is even more important with a test result based on P.C.R’.”

TAKEAWAY FROM THE TIMES: No large study validating the uniformity of PCR results, from lab to lab, has ever been done. At least a dozen very large studies should have checked for uniform results, before unleashing the PCR on the public; but no, this was not the case. It is still not the case.

Now imagine the scandalous information in these three NY Times articles appearing everywhere—on Twitter, FB, Instagram, etc. It would be terrible for Bill Gates, Fauci, and other great leaders in the Holy Church of Biological Mysticism.

Political leaders and public health experts would have, on their hands, a major refutation of their whole narrative about the “deadly pandemic.”

We can’t allow that.

We must protect the public from the Times.

The only way to achieve this is through censorship.

Ban the NY Times from Twitter and Facebook.

Do it now.

If Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg refuse, Attorneys General of all 50 states should sue them at once.

Freeze their personal and corporate bank accounts.

Place them on a special list of “COVID insurrectionists.”

As for the Times, seize their assets, remove them from online platforms, stop the distribution of their newspapers—using military force, if necessary—and cut off all communication from their wire service to other news outlets.

Keeping the public safe is paramount. This is our duty.

CENSORSHIP IS FREEDOM.

MIND CONTROL IS LOVE.

LOCKDOWNS LEAD TO PROSPERITY.

That is all for now.


SOURCES:

[1] nytimes.com/2020/09/22/opinion/covid-vaccine-coronavirus.html

[2] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

[3] nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Case for One Billion Americans? | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on January 19, 2021

We now must confront a problem. If Yglesias recognizes the value of free choice in these instances, how does he reconcile this with his support for planning to maintain American world hegemony? I do not know the answer, but I’d like to offer a suggestion. He seems very well-versed in Chicago price theory, and, as Murray Rothbard pointed out, Chicago economists often do not regard taxation as interference with the price-system. Given this position, they can in their own minds consistently oppose price controls but support redistributive taxation. I don’t know whether Yglesias holds to this doctrine, but if so, it would make what he says in the book more coherent.

https://mises.org/wire/case-one-billion-americans

David Gordon

One Billion Americans: The Case for Thinking Bigger
by Matthew Yglesias
Portfolio Penguin, 2020
xx + 267 pages

Matthew Yglesias, a cofounder of Vox and frequent writer for it, has some useful insights in this book. But he perfectly exemplifies a type of mind that is capable of doing great damage. I hesitate to say this, as he seems engaging and intelligent, but the evidence is unmistakable. He is a statist and planner, who sees his goal for America as obviously true. He fully recognizes the controversial nature of some of the measures he favors to achieve his goal, and he will be glad to debate you about their merits; but practically all Americans, he thinks, accept this goal.

The goal is to keep America as the most powerful nation in the world. He says,

The United States has been the number one power in the world throughout my entire lifetime and throughout the living memory of essentially everyone on the planet today. The notion that this state of affairs is desirable and ought to persist is one of the least controversial things you could say in American politics today…while some left-wing intellectuals might suggest that the end of American hegemony would be desirable, I’ve never heard an elected official from either party articulate that view. (p. xiv)

What happens if we are not the world hegemon? Isn’t it enough that people can live their lives in peace, defending ourselves only if we are invaded by another nation? Indeed, isn’t it wrong for any nation, even America, to rule over other nations?

Oddly enough given his goal, Yglesias recognizes that some things that go on in foreign countries aren’t our business, and he favors reducing American military spending. He says,

Military defense is an important national task, but a very large share of this money seems to be spent on things like prolonged deployments to the Middle East that are only tangentially related to actually defending the country—or even to defending reliable allies….When something bad is happening somewhere in the world—Libya, Syria, whatever—there is often a sense that the United States perhaps ought to “do something” about it. Nobody expects Chile or Singapore to “do something” about foreign civil wars because there is nothing they can do. But the American military is vast enough that we can, in fact, intervene—albeit at additional cost. If these interventions were systematically helpful, it might be a good reason to maintain such a large defense establishment. But the cost-benefit ratio of trying to help foreigners through military intervention is miserable—indeed, it’s difficult to ascertain whether the trillions spent on twentieth-first-century wars have been helpful on net at all. (pp. 248–49)

Has Yglesias changed from an ultrahawk at the beginning of the book to a benevolent noninterventionist near the book’s end? Alas, his conversion is incomplete: we must limit wasteful military spending so that we can concentrate on a confrontation with our main enemy, China. Why China is a threat to us is nowhere explained. The principal sin of its government is that it seeks to unseat us as the world’s foremost power, and we cannot have that, can we?

Yglesias acknowledges that China’s ascendancy would not pose a direct threat to America, but nevertheless it cannot be accepted. Never mind why.

And, obviously, even if China were to become a greater military power, it’s not as if we’d have Chinese tanks rolling down the streets of Washington. . .But American leaders, with good reason, aren’t talking about learning to adapt to a world where the United States is a second-rate power. (p. xvii) 

But even if we accept Yglesias’s goal, aren’t we relatively safe? Isn’t America much richer than China? Yes, says Yglesias, at least for now, but China has an advantage over us that wealth alone will not suffice to counter. Our author thinks that history is on the side of the big battalions, and that we will succumb unless we can counter China’s superior population. If we want to maintain American hegemony, “we’re going to need more people—about a billion people—and then follow that inference to where it leads in terms of immigration, family policy and the welfare state, housing, transportation, and more” (p. xiv).

For Yglesias, strong government isn’t the problem: it’s usually the solution. At one point, I thought I had misjudged him. A section heading in the chapter “Comeback Cities” reads. “Decentralize the federal government.” Has he for once abandoned centralism for localism? You will not be surprised to learn that he hasn’t. He doesn’t mean that he wants the have the states, or even better, local government, take over the functions of our bloated Leviathan. To the contrary, he wants to move parts of the federal government to areas he considers underpopulated to encourage people to settle there. “The key point is to identify cities that, like Detroit or Cleveland, are currently overbuilt from the standpoint of housing stock and infrastructure—cheap rents, few traffic jams, airports that are operating below their historical capacity—and provide them with the biggest thing they need to succeed, an infusion of new jobs and people” (pp. 168–69).

One could proceed by giving more examples of the author’s compulsion to plan our lives, but, with characteristic generosity, I won’t do that. Instead, I’ll give some examples in which he makes sense by actually proposing to ease the iron grip of government. In line with his support of large numbers of people in small spaces, he opposes land-use regulations that use force to keep people living apart. “The vast majority of America’s developed land is zoned exclusively for single-family detached homes. That’s true not just in suburbs, but in central cities….Obviously if you make it illegal to deploy the best available technology for conquering land scarcity, then land scarcity will become a serious problem” (p. 194). In a brilliant passage, he points out that many people like single-family homes but “just because something is desirable doesn’t mean it makes sense to require it—a concept American policy makers have little trouble grasping in almost any context other than housing” (p. 197, emphasis in original).

He calls for easing the licensing requirements to practice medicine:

As Dean Baker, the idiosyncratic left-wing economist who’s been writing about this issue for years explains, “Currently, foreign doctors are banned from practicing unless they complete a U.S. residency program. Foreign dentists are prohibited from practicing in the United States unless they graduate from a U.S. dental school.”…a sensible approach would be to establish some clear objective training standards and then allow anyone who can meet them to practice in the United States…simply increasing the supply of doctors would make getting treatment easier and more convenient for everyone—a clear win. (pp. 127–28)

We now must confront a problem. If Yglesias recognizes the value of free choice in these instances, how does he reconcile this with his support for planning to maintain American world hegemony? I do not know the answer, but I’d like to offer a suggestion. He seems very well-versed in Chicago price theory, and, as Murray Rothbard pointed out, Chicago economists often do not regard taxation as interference with the price-system. Given this position, they can in their own minds consistently oppose price controls but support redistributive taxation. I don’t know whether Yglesias holds to this doctrine, but if so, it would make what he says in the book more coherent.

And support heavy taxation he certainly does. Faced with the not insignificant question of how his ambitious plans are to be financed, he answers that “to the extent we need higher taxes, it makes sense to tax things we would like to see less of. One set of popular options involves increasing taxes on the wealthy….The other big source of potential tax revenue is taxing bad things” (pp. 248–49). The “bad thing” he has principally in mind is alcohol consumption. It doesn’t interfere with freedom if the government makes consumption of goods it doesn’t like much more difficult: it isn’t forbidding people to consume them. Such pettifoggery ill serves the cause of freedom, but it may well be useful in the global crusade against China. Author:

Contact David Gordon

David Gordon is Senior Fellow at the Mises Institute and editor of the Mises Review.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »