MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘SOCIAL DISTANCING’

What Would Happen? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on October 13, 2020

Had governments done nothing in response to the Coronavirus, individuals and businesses would have done much more, and done so without going out of business.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/laurence-m-vance/what-would-happen/

By Laurence M. Vance

What would happen—

If kids in all K-12 schools, colleges, and universities went back to school.

If neither teachers nor students wore masks.

If sporting events had spectators.

If stadiums were allowed to fill to capacity.

If football coaches and their staff ceased wearing masks.

If stores removed directional arrows from their floors.

If waiters and waitresses stopped wearing masks.

If cities and counties reopened their parks, playgrounds, and basketball courts.

If restaurant patrons stopped wearing masks when they walked to their table and to the restroom. Propper Men’s BA… Buy New $82.57 (as of 05:56 EDT – Details)

If every place of business removed social distancing lines and circles from their floors.

If all the bars and nightclubs reopened.

If all the gyms reopened.

If family members could visit the elderly in nursing homes.

If all the movie theatres reopened.

If no one wore masks to theatres.

If no one practiced social distancing.

If no one wore masks to amusement parks.

If family members could visit sick relatives in the hospital.

If all concerts resumed.

If people didn’t wear masks on airplanes.

If airlines didn’t block their middle seats.

If people quit wearing masks while bike riding.

If all the churches reopened.

If everyone sang in church.

If churches stopped only seating people in every other pew.

If no one wore a mask to church.

If all lockdowns were lifted.

If grocery stores quit wiping down their carts.

If people stopped washing their hands twenty times a day.

If no government offices did temperature checks.

If all the beaches reopened.

If no one wore face shields.

If no one wore a mask while working out at the gym.

If all curfews were ended. Naicissism Slouchy Bea… Buy New $10.99 (as of 05:56 EDT – Details)

If all barber shops and nail salons reopened.

If Americans all stopped being germaphobes.

If stores removed their plexiglass shields.

If everyone stopped bathing their hands in hand sanitizer throughout the day.

If all the buffets opened back up.

If businesses opened to 100 percent capacity.

If people stopped wearing masks in their car.

If life returned to “normal.”

What would happen? Knowing what we know now about the coronavirus, I can say with confidence that absolutely nothing would happen that has not happened already or will happen in the future if things continue as they are.

John Tamny was exactly right when he wrote back on March 21:

What would have happened on the city, state and national levels if politicians had quite simply done nothing in response to the spreading virus? If so, does anyone seriously think that the death rate would be substantially higher, and that information about this potentially lethal virus wouldn’t have reached a population increasingly connected to the internet all day, and every day?

Had governments done nothing in response to the Coronavirus, individuals and businesses would have done much more, and done so without going out of business.

The cure for the coronavirus is truly much worse than the disease.

The Best of Laurence M. Vance

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom; War, Christianity, and the State: Essays on the Follies of Christian Militarism; War, Empire, and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy; King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, and many other books. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society.

Be seeing you

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

Martial Law Is Unacceptable Regardless Of The Circumstances

Posted by M. C. on August 3, 2020

As I write this, the state of New Jersey among others is implementing a draconian response against businesses that defy lockdown orders. NJ just arrested the owners of a gymnasium in Bellmawr who refused to close down. Even though they used social distancing measures and applied their own guidelines, the state has decided that citizens are children that must be controlled rather than adults that can make their own choices. This sets a dangerous precedence for the whole country.

http://www.alt-market.com/index.php/articles/4289-martial-law-is-unacceptable-regardless-of-the-circumstances

Brandon Smith

Back in 2014, hundreds if not thousands of conservatives and liberty movement activists converged on a farm in rural Clark County, Nevada. The purpose was to protest the incursion of federal government agents onto the property of the Bundy family, who had defied pressure from the Bureau of Land Management to stop allowing their cattle to feed on “federal land” in a form of free ranging. It was a practice that had been going on for decades and one that was required for the Bundy farm to survive, ended abruptly by environmental laws protecting a tortoise.

The Bundy family had been improving on the area with water sources and other measures for generations without interference. The claim by the BLM and other agencies was that the farmers were destroying wildlife habitat with their cattle, yet the Bundy’s land improvements had actually allowed wildlife to THRIVE in areas where animals would find life difficult or impossible otherwise.

The federal government became fixated on the Bundy’s, and decided to make an example out of them. Their defiance of the crackdown on their use of the land was met with extreme measures, including their cattle impounded, their farm being surrounded and sniper teams placed in the hills nearby. The liberty movement saw this as the last straw, and so reacted at a grassroots level. The concern was that Bundy Ranch could become another Waco. They locked and loaded and went to defend the Bundy’s.

I completely agreed at the time with the efforts surrounding Bundy Ranch and I still agree with them today. The federal government had overstepped its bounds on multiple occasions when it came to rural farmers in sagebrush country and everyone had finally had enough. The feds were faced with a group of armed liberty movement members and eventually ran away. They even gave the Bundy’s back the cattle the feds had initially tried to confiscate. This event showcased the power of the people to repel tyranny when necessary.

The claim that the public is impotent against government force was summarily trounced.  The action was not perfect, and there were many internal disputes and a plethora of mistakes, but overall it had achieved its goal.  It sent a message to the establishment that if you try to assert unconstitutional force against the citizenry there is a chance a Bundy Ranch scenario might happen again, and next time it might not simply be a defensive measure.

I mention Bundy Ranch because I want to remind conservatives of their roots. We are a constitutional movement. We are a small government movement. We believe in individual rights, states rights and the 10th Amendment, as well as strict limitations placed on the federal government and state governments when they try to violate the Bill of Rights.  If you don’t believe in these things, you are not a conservative or a constitutionalist.

No government, whether state or federal, supersedes the boundaries placed upon them by the constitution. Once they violate those boundaries, they must be put in check by the citizenry, for the constitution is merely an object that represents an ideal. It can’t defend itself. If a government undermines constitutional protections, it is not a failure of the constitution, it is a failure by the public to act.

Sadly, there are “conservatives” out there who supported the efforts at Bundy Ranch in 2014, but are now calling for federal overreach and martial law today. The very same people who argued vehemently against unconstitutional actions back then are arguing for bending or breaking the rules of the constitution now. This is something I have been warning about for years…

The greatest threat to freedom is not the government, extreme leftists or the globalist cabal; the greatest threat is when freedom fighters foresake their own principles and start rationalizing tyranny because it happens to benefit them in the moment. If freedom fighters stop fighting for freedom, who remains pick up the mantle? No one. And thus, the globalists and collectivists win the long game.

Right now there are two sides calling for martial law-like restrictions on the public, and both sides think they are doing what is best for society at large. They both believe they are morally justified and that totalitarian actions are necessary for “the greater good”. Both sides are wrong.

The Pandemic Puritans

On one side, we have a group made up primarily of political leftists but also some conservatives who say that the coronavius pandemic creates a scenario in which medical tyranny must be established to protect the public from itself. Leftists enjoy control in general and the pandemic simply offers an opportunity for them to act out their totalitarian fantasies in real life.

These are the people who wag their fingers at others on the street or in the park or at the beach for not “social distancing” properly. These are the people that inform on their neighbors, or inform on local businesses for not following strict guidelines. These are the people that get a thrill from forcing other people to conform.

This is not to say that precautions are not warranted, they certainly are. However, these precautions MUST be up to individuals, not enforced by bureaucracy. The moment you hand government ultimate power to dictate people’s health decisions, personal daily activities, freedom of assembly and their ability to participate in the economy, you have given the government ultimate power to destroy our very culture. No government should be allowed to have that kind of influence.

The issue here is one of the greater EVIL, not the greater good. What is the greater evil? To avoid unconstitutional measures, avoid violating individual rights and allow the virus to spread faster than it normally would? Or, to completely throw out the Bill of Rights, individual liberty and economic security in the name of a brand of “safety” that is ambiguous and undefined?

As I write this, the state of New Jersey among others is implementing a draconian response against businesses that defy lockdown orders. NJ just arrested the owners of a gymnasium in Bellmawr who refused to close down. Even though they used social distancing measures and applied their own guidelines, the state has decided that citizens are children that must be controlled rather than adults that can make their own choices. This sets a dangerous precedence for the whole country.

Understand that small businesses that are not deemed “essential” by arbitrary decree from the state are on the verge of bankruptcy and collapse. Millions of people are having their livelihoods threatened by the lockdowns. Millions of jobs are at risk. Is the coronavirus really worth destroying our own economic system? Because that is EXACTLY what is happening right now. The US economy was already suffering from destabilization, and now the pandemic response is putting the final nail in the coffin.

If the economy tanks far more people will die from the resulting crisis of poverty, crime and civil unrest than will EVER die from the coronavirus pandemic. When you look at the big picture, how can anyone justify medical tyranny and martial law measures? There is simply no logical explanation for violating the economic and personal freedom of Americans in response to a disease. If some people die from the virus, so be it. Its a small price to pay to keep our freedoms intact.  Furthermore, I would stand by that argument even if I get sick from the virus.

Sock Puppet Conservatives

There are people out there that like constitutional rights and civil liberties “in theory”, but in practice they view these rights as inconvenient to their goals.  For these so-called “conservatives”, the Bill of Rights is only for peacetime. When war or domestic conflict rolls around, our rights are suddenly forfeit.

I use this particular metaphor often but I really can’t find a better one:

Government power is like the “one ring” in Lord Of The Rings. Everyone desperately wants control of it. The side of evil thirsts for it. The side of good thinks that if only they had it they could use it for honorable ends; they think they can use it to defeat evil. They are wrong.

The “one ring” (government power) corrupts ALL. It cannot be controlled. It cannot be used for good. Eventually, it warps the minds of those who hold it, twisting them into something grotesque. Good people who exploit the ring end up becoming the very monsters they were trying to defeat, and evil wins.

Right now through the Trump Administration conservatives are being tempted with the “one ring”. We are being tempted with ultimate government power. The leftist hordes and their actions are egregious. They act irrationally and foolishly. Their communist ideology and mindless zealotry is destructive and they openly seek the collapse of western civilization. But in the end this doesn’t matter.  They are nothing more than useful idiots for a greater agenda.

It’s interesting that the only solution I see being presented in conservative circles lately is the use of federal power to crush the protests and riots. Again, this might seem like a reasonable action in the face of so much lawlessness, but if taken too far the implications are horrifying.

Some conservative groups are cheering the deployment of federal agencies to cities like Portland in the name of stopping civil unrest, but there is a fine line between law enforcement and martial law. And by martial law, I mean ANY government force that is designed to suppress or break civil protections. This does not only include a military presence, it can also include federal agencies overstepping their bounds, just as they did at Bundy Ranch.

In Portland and other cities like New York, federal agents and police have been snatching protesters off the street in unmarked vans without identifying themselves.  Essentially, they are black-bagging people. This is the kind of behavior which real conservatives traditionally despise.

Yes, some of these protesters did in fact loot or participate in property damage; and some of them did absolutely nothing.  This is being done under 40 US Code 1315 which was signed into law by Neo-con president George W. Bush after the 9/11 attacks as part of the tidal wave of unconstitutional Patriot Act measures that were railroaded through during mass fear and panic.

Conservatives have been warning for years about the potential for misuse of these laws to violate people’s rights. Will we now support them because they are being enforced against people we don’t like? I will say this: If an unmarked van with unidentified armed people tried to grab me off the street, I would do everything in my power to put a bullet in each and every one of them.  And, I would not hold it against any person who did the same, even if they were my ideological opponent.

Some conservatives are calling for much more, including the deployment of the National Guard or a standing military presence. The use of such tactics opens the door to serious consequences, and I believe if we allow the federal government to bend the rules now, we set the stage for expansive martial law in the near future. By extension, labeling looters or rioters as “terrorists” also has dangerous implications.  Those of us that were activists during the Obama years know how freely that label is thrown around by government and the media.

We might feel righteous in violating the civil liberties of social justice Marxists because of their insane behavior and the threat they pose to the stability of the country, but, what happens when the roles are reversed? During Bundy Ranch, conservatives were also being labeled “terrorists”, and who is to say we won’t find ourselves in that position again?   Would defying the pandemic lockdowns also be considered an existential threat to the country?

Uncomfortable Questions

There are some questions in all of this that are either not being asked or are being deliberately avoided.  For example:

1) Why is it that the Trump Administration has not bothered to go after the elites and globalists FUNDING Antifa and BLM groups behind the unrest?  Why does George Soros and his Open Society Foundation get to operate in the US with impunity?  And what about the Ford Foundation?  Members of that institution openly admit that they have been funding and organizing the social justice cult for decades.  Shouldn’t the men behind the curtain paying for the entire thing be targeted first, instead of going after the useful idiots?  Perhaps the fact that Trump is surrounded by those very same elites in his cabinet has something to do with it…

2) If we support martial law measures, WHO are we giving that power to?  Is it Trump, or the deep state ghouls that advise him daily?  People like Wilber Ross, a New York Rothschild banking agent, Mike Pompeo, a long time Neo-con warmonger and promoter of mass surveillance, Robert Lightheizer, a member of the globalist Council On Foreign Relations, Steve Mnuchin, former Goldman Sachs banker, Larry Kudlow, former Federal Reserve, etc.  Even if you think Trump has the best of intentions, can anyone honestly say the same for his cabinet?

3) When the left is “defeated” and the riots stop, will martial law simply fade away, or, is it a Pandora’s Box that can never be closed again?  And if it doesn’t end, will supporters justify fighting against not just leftists, but also conservatives who will not tolerate it?  I for one will be among the people that will not tolerate it.

Real Solutions

There are other much better solutions than martial law when confronting the leftist riots or the pandemic.

For the pandemic, stop trying to dictate public behavior.  If individuals feel they are at risk from the virus, then they can take their own precautions.  The only other option is to continue on the path of shutdowns and an informant society that will destroy this nation in a matter of months.

Foe the leftists, communities that stage an armed presence in the face of protests have ALL escaped riots and property damage. Sometimes Antifa and BLM decide to not even show up. We DON’T NEED a federal presence or a military presence to get the job done. We can do it ourselves. We already have proof that this strategy works.

And, if the lefties want to burn down their own neighborhoods and cities and local governments don’t want to stop them, then I say let it happen. It’s sad for the people in these places that had no dog in the fight, but maybe this will teach the locals to speak out against BLM or Antifa instead of remaining silent or virtue signaling their support in the hopes that their businesses won’t be attacked.  Maybe they should look for better government officials as well.

Finally, it’s far past time to go after the elites that fund and engineer such groups.  Remove their influence and I suspect many people will be shocked at how fast all this unrest and chaos suddenly disappears.  Isn’t this what people wanted Trump to do from the very beginning?  And yet, nothing happens to the vampires at the top.

Only cowards demand everyone else give up their freedoms just so they can feel safe.  The establishment is trying to pit the American people against each other as a means to pave a path to tyranny. I believe what the elites want more than anything else is to trick conservatives into forsaking their own principles. If we do, we become hypocrites that can no longer sustain a movement for freedom. By becoming the monster to fight the monster we hand our enemies victory. This is unacceptable.

 

 

 

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

 

After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.

 

You can contact Brandon Smith at:

brandon@alt-market.com

Or, follow me at Parler by searching:  @Altmarket

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Dispatch From the Front – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 11, 2020

After a moment of stunned silence an angry SM said “that sounds like a resignation.” Probably a bluff to scare me into compliance. JM agreed that it sounded like a resignation. I agreed it sounded like a resignation. So SM asked me, “so is this a resignation?” I said, “I guess so.” Done deal.

In prior thinking about the possible outcomes of an encounter such as this my Walter Mitty wanted me to utter the parting words, “I regret that I have but one job to give for liberty.” (To paraphrase Becky Akers’ correction of a well known saying.) But in the moment it didn’t come to mind.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/07/no_author/dispatch-from-the-front/

By Rod Peet, Jr.

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

I thought my employer was my friend. I was approaching retirement without a job and it appeared I would be in dire straits during that final phase of life. Then I was given my latest job. It wasn’t an act of friendship, per se. More an act of capitalism. We both benefited. I made close acquaintances there. It felt like an act of friendship to me. Retirement was going to be OK.

Then the corona virus struck. It appeared to be a more aggressive form of the flu but the flu nonetheless. Precautions should be taken. Wash hands, isolate the sick, protect the elderly. Fine. Common sense response.

Then everyone’s enemy, the government, struck. Governments across the country began to engage in criminal activity (see U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1; Texas Constitution, Bill of Rights, Sections 6, 19, 27, 28, 29;  Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242).

Masks, anti-social distancing, isolation, lock downs, new propaganda (“shelter-in-place”, “we’re all in this together”, “flatten the curve”, “stay safe”, misleading statistics, etc., etc.). Business were crushed, lives destroyed, generations unborn pushed further into debt.

Then my new friend became friends with my enemy. Reaping billions of dollars in the process.

My employer mandated all the soul crushing activity for it’s employees that governments were mandating for the general population.

The friend of my enemy is my enemy. I found myself stuck behind enemy lines.

What to do. Join the enemy? For most this was the easiest thing to do. So they did. For me it was impossible. Fight the enemy? For most that was impossible. For me it was easy (but highly stressful). So I did.

I was a flight instructor for a major U.S. airline. My duties were to train new hire pilots and provide recurrent training for current pilots. On a typical day I would spend 90 minutes briefing them on a variety of topics and review the maneuvers we were going to practice in the simulator. Then it was four hours in the simulator practicing various procedures.

When the corona virus struck our training operation was shut down for three weeks for a thorough cleaning. We were informed that when we went back to work we were to wear masks while in the building, practice (anti-) social distancing and keep the place as sanitary as an operating room. I could not imagine talking for almost six hours with a mask on.

Thanks to LewRockwell.com I knew the masks did not work, were actually detrimental to our health, projected an image of fear, and were part of governments’ agendas to isolate people and keep them in fear. All the better to control them.

I knew I was not going to keep my job. But rather than just cross over the battle lines by quitting I thought I would plant some seeds of liberty and strike a small blow for freedom.

Before work resumed after the cleaning I sent an email to my supervisor (Junior Manager) asking the question children love to ask but are eventually trained to avoid: “Why?” Why the masks? I cited many statistics concerning the virus, mask use, transmissibility, etc. No answer.

Over 80 other employees received my email as I was responding to an email sent to everyone in the department. I got a few disagreements accompanied by “news” articles that pushed the scary narrative. Again, thanks to Lew Rockwell, I was able to refute the articles. No response to my critiques.

My final activities at work included not wearing a mask. In the spirit of colonial pamphleteers I placed printouts in the break rooms. The “pamphlets” contain facts that put the corona virus propaganda in context and expose the falsehoods. I should have signed them with a scarlet pimpernel but didn’t think of it at the time.

In case any of my students expressed concern over my not wearing a mask I prepared a single page paper with some facts concerning the efficacy wearing a mask and the transmissibility of the virus. One crew I showed it to requested to keep a copy of it. I jokingly said that with the creeping Communism about they should be careful because it might be considered contraband. Well, the joke was on me. I was right about the Communism but was wrong about their role. Turns out they were snitches, not sympathizers. They turned my papers over to management. We have a prohibition against unauthorized “handouts”. I understood this with respect to training materials. I didn’t think it applied to non-training information presented outside the scheduled training period. At least that was my reasoning. That is what I got called on the carpet for a couple of days ago. There was a meeting to “council” me. Had I READ the paper to the students nothing would have happened.

As luck would have it that day was also the day I decided to wear a mask in the building so as to avoid being accused of violating the mask policy. It had been very stressful going against company policy so I wore a “mask”. Like this one:

Got a variety of responses. I had it with me when I went to “the meeting”. The participants in the meeting were Senior Manager, Junior Manager, Union Rep and the Perp (me). SM was clearly angered by the mask. I said I was just following orders to wear a mask. That, in fact, my mask was more impervious than the cloth ones everyone else was wearing. This further angered him. He accused me of “calling out the sheep in the room”. I guess the shoe fit but pinched a bit.

The meeting was in a large conference room. I was the first to sit and the rest sat down about 10 feet from each other. Social distancing, dontcha know.

During the conversation I pointed out some of the contradictions in the mask policy. UR replied with appeals to authority and some irrelevant facts.

I asked, “why are you so afraid of the virus?” SM said, “we’re not afraid of the virus”. I asked, “so why are you acting like you are afraid?” No answer.

Every time I made a comment they could not respond to they reiterated that they were not going to debate this. I WILL wear a “proper” mask.

It’s interesting that there appeared to be no indication that they were going to fire me. A letter of counseling had been prepared in advance and signed by management. All it needed was my signature.

I was told that I was to follow protocol. If I didn’t I would be subject to another “counseling”. No word about being fired. It seems I could either comply or continue to suffer these meetings. They asked me if I wanted more such meetings. I said there would be no more meetings. I think they thought I was going to comply. My thought was I will not keep this job if I must comply and therefore there would be no more meetings. But I didn’t say that. I let them think what they will until I figured out a principled way out of this. I did not want to quit merely because I did not want to wear a mask. That would just be my stubbornness against theirs.

I don’t think they wanted to fire me. In the course of my job I rarely interact with other instructors or management personnel. I come in, spend 6 hours with two pilots, then go home. I generally get very little feedback on how I am doing as an instructor. But for some reason, over the past few weeks, a variety of sources have remarked that I have a good reputation and am considered one of the better instructors.

I don’t think they expected me to quit either. Who would give up an intriguing job that requires only 6 hours a day, 17 days a month and pays extremely well?

JM, my about-to-be-ex-supervisor, unwittingly handed me the solution. He asked me if I was a vet. “Yes”. What branch? “Air Force”. How long? “Four years”. The others all piped up with their branch of service and how long. I detected a new tone in their voices. More relaxed. Oh boy! We are all in the same club! I was part of the inner circle. They had me now. JM told me that they were all “leaders”. That I was a “leader”.  As such it was my job to set an example and enforce the rules. This is when the light dawned and I had a clear vision of what I had to do.

If I was to be a “leader” in this organization I would have to defend and enforce rules I did not believe in. I have facts that contradict the narrative yet I must ignore those facts and spout the company line no matter how much I disagree with it.

I told JM I was glad he mentioned leadership. That it gave me some clarity and would make coming to a decision easier. That I never thought of myself as a leader or that I was in leadership position. I agreed with him. I guess I am a leader and should act accordingly. He looked like he had hit the mark and thought I was coming around. Then I pointed to my cloth mask laying on the table and said, “as a leader that is not a direction I care to lead anyone.” I told them that between the masking and the riots this country is going down the tubes. We have had sensitivity training for sexual harassment and “unconscious bias”. Now it appears we will have training to root out “systemic racism”. “I cannot and will not lead anyone in that direction”, I said. That was not what they expected.

After a moment of stunned silence an angry SM said “that sounds like a resignation.” Probably a bluff to scare me into compliance. JM agreed that it sounded like a resignation. I agreed it sounded like a resignation. So SM asked me, “so is this a resignation?” I said, “I guess so.” Done deal. I was resigning on the principle that I could not lead people in a destructive direction. I had exposed the sheep to anyone who would observe. I made my case. I stood my ground. I wish I could have been more eloquent in my arguments but I am satisfied.

When we stood up and headed toward the door we ended up within a couple of feet of each other without masks on. I looked at them but they were not looking at anyone. It felt like an awkward departure. (Like a musical phrase without a cadence?) So I said, “it’s been good working with you” and held out my hand. They each shook it. Contrary to policy. That felt better.

In prior thinking about the possible outcomes of an encounter such as this my Walter Mitty wanted me to utter the parting words, “I regret that I have but one job to give for liberty.” (To paraphrase Becky Akers’ correction of a well known saying.) But in the moment it didn’t come to mind.

 

 

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

Another day, another bogus report from CDC seeking to entice the public to continue wearing masks – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on June 17, 2020

If they wanted a legitimate story, they would have looked at cases in states without the face mask requirement to see how many cases they had from April 17 to May 9.  Instead of doing that, they just made numbers up, and the media, like puppets, repeat the bogus numbers to indoctrinate people into wearing masks.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/06/another_day_another_bogus_report_from_cdc_seeking_to_entice_the_public_to_continue_wearing_masks.html

The CDC now says it has proof that wearing face masks reduced COVID-19 cases in NYC by 66,000 from April 17 to May 9.

Face masks reduce New York coronavirus cases by over 66,000, study deems it most effective way to check spread

Health experts have been advising people to wear face masks in public to prevent the spread of Covid-19 and now numbers indicate that it works. A new study shows that wearing a face mask dramatically decreases a person’s chances of being infected by the new coronavirus. Researchers found that using a face mask alone reduced the number of Covid-19 infections by more than 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9.

There is no way they would know this, and it is as made up as the modeling numbers that CDC put out in March that showed that hundreds of millions would get the disease and millions would die.  That is the study that destroyed the economy and caused governors throughout the country to require us to wear masks, social distance, and avoid large groups for the first time in our lives.

If they wanted a legitimate story, they would have looked at cases in states without the face mask requirement to see how many cases they had from April 17 to May 9.  Instead of doing that, they just made numbers up, and the media, like puppets, repeat the bogus numbers to indoctrinate people into wearing masks.

Here are more made up modeling reports, without scientific facts, that have destroyed the U.S economy and forced much of the public to wear face masks, social distance, and gather in small groups for the first time in most of our lives:

Could Coronavirus Kill a Million Americans?

COVID-19 predicted to infect 81% of U.S. population, cause 2.2 million deaths in U.S.

We were told that millions would die, and hundreds of millions would get COVID-19.  The death projections were over-projected by over 1,000 percent and cases by an exponential amount.  So far, six tenths of a percent of the population has tested positive, including people with no symptoms.

How many fewer deaths would there have been if idiotic governors like Cuomo hadn’t forced nursing homes to take in people they knew had COVID-19?

How many fewer deaths would there be associated with COVID-19 if the CDC didn’t politically dictate to medical professionals to count cancer, heart, stroke, lung, diabetes, obesity, kidney, and other deaths as COVID-19 if they happened to get COVID?  As far as I can tell, we have never had that mandate with the swine flu or seasonal flu.

How many fewer deaths from suicide, drug overdose, and other causes would we have if these bogus modeling numbers hadn’t been used to destroy the economy?

Can anyone imagine if millions of people with no symptoms went to the doctor or a clinic and demanded that they be tested for the flu?  When the medical professionals asked why they wanted to be tested, they would say because the media, bureaucrats, and politicians were demanding they be tested because they might be killing people.  The insurance companies and doctors would refuse to test, but that is what we are doing now to goose the daily numbers to scare the public.

Then the media widely regurgitated a made up report, with no scientific evidence, that said 200,000 people per day would be testing positive for COVID-19 and 3,000 people per day would be dying because, heaven forbid, people were going back to work and gathering a little bit.  The numbers were overestimated by 900% on cases and 200% on deaths, but the public was scared into submission.  The power-hungry governors really cared, but facts don’t matter.

Draft report predicts covid-19 cases will reach 200,000 a day by June 1

draft government report projects covid-19 cases will surge to about 200,000 per day by June 1, a staggering jump that would be accompanied by more than 3,000 deaths each day.

One of the most humorous made up reports that was also repeated, was from the brilliant, highly esteemed Columbia University that essentially blamed Trump for 36,000 deaths.  You see, according to their brilliant educators, Trump should have instituted strict policies while Fauci  and the CDC were saying it wasn’t very dangerous in the U.S.  The highly educated journalists just repeated what they were told with no questions.

U.S. Could Have Saved 36,000 Lives If Social Distancing Started 1 Week Earlier: Study

The U.S. could have prevented roughly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if broad social distancing measures had been put in place just one week earlier in March, according to an analysis from Columbia University.

Underlining the importance of aggressively responding to the coronavirus, the study found the U.S. could have avoided at least 700,000 fewer infections if actions that began on March 15 had actually started on March 8.

Here are some of the other hoaxes, lies, talking points and propaganda that most of the media, entertainers, bureaucrats have used to indoctrinate the public into submission on COVID 19 and to destroy the economy:

  • President Trump never said that COVID 19 was a hoax, but we still hear that Democrat talking point. Trump was one of the first to react with his China travel ban and much of the media and other democrats called that racist, xenophobic and an overreaction. He’s called a racist and xenophobe no matter what he does.
  • That the disease wouldn’t spread human to human: by WHO, Bill Gates among others. Those were the people spreading a hoax, not Trump.
  • That the mortality rate was much higher than the seasonal flu.
  • That millions of asymptomatic people were spreading the disease. A spokesman at WHO recently said that there was no scientific evidence this is true but the next day caved and said we misunderstood so the lie continued.
  • That the hospitals would be overwhelmed. Most hospitals have been underwhelmed and are starving because politicians deemed elective medical care as non-essential.
  • That children would spread the disease to Grandparents and kill them.
  • That COVID 19 is easily spread off surfaces. After months, we were told by CDC that this wasn’t true.
  • That children at schools were very vulnerable. Schools that remained open are fine.
  • That states that had less strict shutdowns would be a disaster and wanted people to die.
  • That rates would skyrocket because of the reopening.
  • That the disease is racist. It kills people who are less healthy no matter what race they are. Why don’t we ask why minorities are more vulnerable since the Democrats have been taking care of them for fifty years with Medicaid and other great society programs? The disease is also not sexist even though it kills more men and women.

We are now getting daily reports that states that have reopened and are less restrictive are having huge problems to scare the public. We are told that is why the stock market is plunging

The actual numbers are readily available, but we won’t see them because the public wouldn’t be scared.

Here are some actual numbers through June 14th:

States with very strict restrictions:

  • New York, Population 19.5 million, deaths 31,662 Last seven-day deaths 507.
  • New Jersey, Population 8.9 million, deaths 12,625 Last seven-day deaths 449.
  • Illinois, Population 12.7 million, deaths 6,308 Last seven-day deaths 404.
  • Michigan, Population 10.0 million, deaths 6,016 Last seven-day deaths 364.

States that are less restrictive and more open:

  • Florida, Population 21.5 million, deaths 2,931 Last seven-day deaths 231.
  • Texas, Population 29.0 million, deaths 1,973 Last seven-day deaths 158.
  • Georgia, Population 10.6 million, deaths 2,451 Last seven-day deaths 271.
  • Colorado, Population 5.8 million, deaths 1.348 Last seven-day deaths 74.
  • Arizona, Population 7.3 million, deaths 1,186 Last seven-day deaths 142.

In all these cases the states that are less restrictive have better results from the start, including the last seven days yet that is not the story the media is presenting. Facts don’t matter.
Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/06/another_day_another_bogus_report_from_cdc_seeking_to_entice_the_public_to_continue_wearing_masks.html#ixzz6Pcq8i7Qp
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Be seeing you

 

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

Social Distancing for Animals? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 8, 2020

The reason the bossy humans don’t try to control animals is because
controlling a virus or a bacteria or a parasite was never their intent
or never something they thought was a practical goal in the first place.
Their intent was always only to dominate those of their own species.
Human tyrants want to control other humans to serve their own interests.
It doesn’t serve their purposes to go to endless lengths to keep rats
at least 6 feet apart from each other. Why even start that discussion
if it can’t result in control over humans?

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/06/no_author/social-distancing-for-animals/

By Karen Hathaway

We have been told for decades that many viral, bacterial, and parasite-based infections in humans originate with animals. They have mentioned bats, birds, swine, sheep, cattle, rabbits, ticks, mosquitoes, and other creatures as being sources of harmful microorganisms that jump to humans and endanger us all.  We are often told that there will be mass deaths amongst humans from such things as swine flu, bird flu, bat viruses, blah, blah, blah if the government doesn’t take action. Basically, the sky is falling and we are all going to die unless we give up lots of money and freedom. It has been the same narrative my whole life.  But, my question is this: Why isn’t anyone putting tape on the forest floors or defining corridors in the sky to direct these inconsiderate or ignorant animals into more appropriate social behavior? Not just for the benefit of the humans, but for the benefit of the poor animals. Won’t anyone think about their plight?

Speaking of human infections; even if people were able to isolate themselves in a way that would prevent a disease from passing from one human to another, does that keep the disease from spreading between the animals that were the supposed source of the disease? Won’t the diseases that allegedly originate with animals continue to be passed from one animal to another in nature until natural immunities develop within that species? But, since natural immunities aren’t good enough for the powers that be, shouldn’t they propose doing something about this ever-present menace?

If social distancing between animals isn’t achievable (certainly they can try), then here’s an idea that should only cost about 30 trillion dollars: Maybe a pharmaceutical company could grow massive amounts of a targeted virus (enough to infect the whole world) and then undergo the standard vaccine preparation protocol by weakening it with radiation and then mixing it with powdered aluminum agitants and chemical immunosuppressants and then spray millions of gallons of it over all the forests of the world to give immunity to all the animals; picture Agent Orange. We could call this aerosol animal vaccine Agent Prophylactis. We could even mix in some antibiotics to deal with animal-borne bacterial diseases like Lyme Disease and pesticides to deal with animal-borne parasites that cause things like malaria in an attempt to get the perfect cocktail, something short of a mix that would kill every living creature. There would certainly be experts that would rubber stamp the need for, and the efficacy of, such a project if paid enough.

Social distancing or mass viral vaccinations for animals would be quite a chore, but certainly the all-powerful fear mongers would want to address this crucial animal issue; wouldn’t they? Although a daunting task, those public health heroes of the same political ilk as the global climate controllers would no doubt think themselves up to the task. If we can strive to control the world’s climate with money and political decrees, then we can certainly deal with all the animals of the world; if not their social behavior, then, at least, their vaccinations. Why don’t human authoritarians desire to even discuss the animal “socializing” threat since critters have been a key part of the never-ending panic narrative that has continued for decades?  Even if the mundanes (head nod to Will Grigg for that term) can’t understand it, why don’t the elite politicians and their subservient court intellectuals even want to discuss the notion of keeping birds and bats from touching each other or from crossing borders from one area to another and passing on cooties? We should at least attempt to control their socialization for the short term until the heroic pharmaceutical companies can produce Agent Prophylactis, shouldn’t we?

The need is clear, isn’t it? Even if a viral or bacterial infection “runs itself out” amongst infected humans during a “lockdown period,” wouldn’t the never-infected humans then be susceptible to infection from the pesky source animals once humans return to their normal lifestyles? The reason the bossy humans don’t try to control animals is because controlling a virus or a bacteria or a parasite was never their intent or never something they thought was a practical goal in the first place. Their intent was always only to dominate those of their own species. Human tyrants want to control other humans to serve their own interests. It doesn’t serve their purposes to go to endless lengths to keep rats at least 6 feet apart from each other.  Why even start that discussion if it can’t result in control over humans? The reason they don’t take scary snapshots of birds sitting together on telephone lines and then talk about “contact tracing” between the fowls of the world is because the engineered panic needs to relate to money and power in the human world. Estimating the distance between buzzards on a dead carcass or ticks on a deer doesn’t appeal to the libido dominandi.  Who cares about the buzzards when you are a human on a power trip. Getting another taxpayer on the hook or under your thumb is another subject entirely.

Maybe Agent Prophylactis is a different story. Maybe they would try that since it would be another way to rob the humans. Maybe I should keep my mouth shut.

 

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

Will Americans Submit to a Second Lockdown? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 20, 2020

The political divide has already begun to appear.

The proponents of a second shutdown will be liberal governors and mayors, the mainstream media and the Nancy Pelosi wing of Congress.

It should not go unmentioned that the latter’s political interests are best served the longer the shutdown endures and the worse the economic situation on Nov. 3. If the economy has failed to begin a robust recovery by fall, the greater the odds that Joe Biden wins the White House.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/patrick-j-buchanan/will-americans-submit-to-a-second-lockdown/

By

On March 24, President Donald Trump said he wanted the country and the economy “opened up and just raring to go by Easter.”

Easter came and went. And Trump was mocked for being aspirational and unrealistic. Yet, with Ascension Thursday at hand, 40 days after Easter, the president seems to have been ahead of his time.

The country, as a whole, is, and has been, opening up. Sunday’s New York Times reports that, for weeks now, more than two-thirds of the states have been relaxing restrictions as Trump had urged.

The reasons: weariness with the lockdown and sheltering in place, a growing belief that the worst of the pandemic is behind us and undeniably positive news from several fronts in the coronavirus war.

“New Cases in U.S. Slow,” ran The New York Times top headline Sunday, adding the cautionary warning, “Posing Risks of Complacency.”

The facts suggest a positive trend. The number of newly confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. has been dropping for a month. The number of deaths has fallen from 2,200 a day in April to closer to 1,400 a day in mid-May. Several days last week recorded fewer than 1,000 deaths, an awful toll but a clear improvement over April.

As of Friday, the rate of new cases of the coronavirus was declining in 19 states and rising in only three. New Orleans and Detroit have seen sharp drops. The number of new cases in New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island has dropped. New cases in Cass County, Indiana, and Sioux Falls, South Dakota, where meatpacking plants had seen outbreaks, have declined.

“On eight of the past nine days,” said the Times, “there have been fewer deaths announced than there were seven days prior, indicating that the virus toll appears to be easing. More than half of the 24 counties that have recorded the most coronavirus deaths, including Oakland County, Mich., and Hartford County, Conn., are seeing sustained declines.”

Still, the thrust of the Times article was about the new crisis we will be courting, should we try to resume normal activities too soon. Do that, says the Times, and we could easily forfeit all the progress we have made.

Message: Social distancing, sheltering in place, wearing masks, working at home — the practices that broke the back of the pandemic — should be sustained for those able to do so.

Clearly, the opening in many states has been driven by popular protest and public demand. Crowds have ignored social distancing to demonstrate for an end to the shutdown. Protesters have refused to wear masks and engaged in the time-honored practice since the ’60s of civil defiance and disobedience.

The protesters seem to be saying: We deplore the losses and know the risks, but we cannot live our lives behind closed doors in our homes until the elites tell us, as though we were children, when we may go out in the yard.

Hence, the next question we are all likely to confront:

If there is a sudden resurgence of the coronavirus, a second wave, and the media elite and blue state governors demand a new shutdown, a new closure of beaches, parks, shops, restaurants and churches, will the people of this republic comply with those demands or defy them?

Will the nation answer back to the elites: We did that. We sheltered in place. We wore the masks. We socially distanced. We stayed in our homes. We stayed home from work. We have done all we were told to do to contain the virus. But, now, with the shutdown having put 36 million Americans on unemployment and sunk our GDP to Depression-era levels, we’re going back to work.

The political divide has already begun to appear.

Among those making the case for ending the shutdown and reopening the country and economy will be Trump, red state governors like Ron DeSantis in Florida and Brian Kemp in Georgia, conservatives in Congress and populists.

The proponents of a second shutdown will be liberal governors and mayors, the mainstream media and the Nancy Pelosi wing of Congress.

It should not go unmentioned that the latter’s political interests are best served the longer the shutdown endures and the worse the economic situation on Nov. 3. If the economy has failed to begin a robust recovery by fall, the greater the odds that Joe Biden wins the White House.

Yet, even if the pandemic returns in the fall, the establishment cannot keep the country closed indefinitely.

Prediction: If the people conclude they have done all they can do to mitigate the suffering from a virus they cannot eradicate, they will resist the imposition of another shutdown, and the establishment will have neither the will nor ability to push them back into their homes.

Ultimately, the people will decide when this shutdown ends, and when a plurality so concludes, the elites will be swept aside.

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

What Did Society Benefit By Social Distancing? | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on May 9, 2020

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/what-did-society-benefit-by-social-distancing/

by

To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so.”- Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Despite the fact that there has already been ample writing, both in the mainstream and in alternative press, on this subject from authors who are both persuasive and amply qualified mathematically and scientifically, this author finds himself wanting to offer a brief entry. As someone who has spent the larger portion of his professional career designing experiments, analyzing data, generating graphs, and writing reports about all of it, articles featuring science, statistics, charts and graphs aplenty seems be natural for me. However, none of that is needed. Instead, let us confine ourselves to the most basic logic.

At present, the United States and the world are locked in the grip of the COVID-19 Pandemic. One might be inclined to call it, “The COVID-19 Panic.” If he did, this author would agree. To fight this threat to life and apparently our very existence on Earth as we know it, the public has been forced to abide by the edicts of mayors, governors, and other leadership, at the local and national level. Those edicts can be summarized via two hashtags that started to trend on Twitter about six weeks ago. To assure that we have the same understanding of these concepts, a couple of definitions are in order.

The concept of flattening the curve, represented by the hashtag #FlattenTheCurve, refers to a statistical approach to mitigating the virus’s impact on society, using what is called a normal distribution to model the number of cases over time. In real life, this type of distribution is a representation of an idealized histogram, that is, vertical bars representing the count of observations per unit time, and positioned on a graph next to each other. The unit of time could be days, hours, minutes, or anything like that. (As an aside, for the vast majority of phenomena observed in our daily lives, a normal distribution is applicable, as justified by the Central Limit Theorem. Why this is true could be the subject of another essay, or hell, an entire book.)

The basic premise is that the height of the bars—representing counts of observations—start out small, and get bigger and bigger, eventually reaching a maximum value or peak, and then returning to getting smaller and smaller. The tallest bar—or peak of the distribution—can then be thought of as the maximum number of individuals (per unit time) who actively have the virus. Let us term this ‘Maximum COVID-19 Patients’. The area under the curve, which is equivalent to simply adding up all the observations in each of the bars, is the total number of people who are stricken with COVID-19. Let us term this, ‘Total COVID-19 Cases’.

From the start of discussions of the pandemic and how to deal with it, this number—the total number of people who would be stricken with the virus, ‘Total COVID-19 Cases’—has not been the subject of major debate; that is to say, the area under the curve was not expected to change markedly. In fact, no one in his or her right mind thought that anything could be done to stop the spread of the disease via behavior. The best we could hope for would be to slow the spread, ostensibly so that the medical establishment—hospitals and other front-line structures—could deal with the onslaught. (One might, if he were optimistic, think that we could develop and distribute a vaccine quickly enough that lengthening societal exposure time was no big deal. That is, if he were an idiot.) That everyone, or effectively everyone, would eventually be exposed was not in doubt.

Flattening the curve could, at best, decrease that peak value, i.e., the maximum number of people exhibiting the disease at a point in time, in exchange for a longer timeframe of population exposure, what I will term ‘Societal Exposure Time’. In summary, ‘Total COVID-19 Cases’ (the area under the curve) would be unchanged, but we would exchange a lower ‘Maximum COVID-19 Patients’ for a longer ‘Societal Exposure Time’. Total number of deaths, unchanged. Length of time, extended. Put a pin in that point.

The concept of social distancing, represented by the hashtag #SocialDistancing, refers to the limiting interpersonal contact. Standing X feet from someone, or wearing a mask, or canceling events that are crowd-centric (such as basketball games or concerts) are all implementations of social distancing. The same is true of forcing the temporary closure of ostensibly “non-essential” businesses. So then, #FlattenTheCurve is the what, and #SocialDistancing is the how. No matter what methodology is utilized for social distancing, it is a means that has, as its raison d’être, flattening the curve. Put a pin in that point as well.

So then, flattening the curve via social distancing could produce, at best, one outcome: slow the progression of the disease so as to limit the loading on hospitals and treatment centers. In a perfect world, that outcome could also result in fewer deaths overall, i.e., a reduction in ‘Maximum COVID-19 Patients’ could, given limited medical resources, decrease the net number of deaths. As already noted, built into this approach is the secondary effect that it also must increase ‘Societal Exposure Time’. Slowing the progression of the disease means, automatically, that the disease is present in a society for longer, other factors being equal.

The direct outcome of government-imposed social distancing was a lock-down on businesses such as bars, restaurants, as well as sporting events and concerts, and on non-essential businesses. This led inexorably to limited or no income for certain sectors of the economy. That lack of income placed a huge strain on people who depended upon the “interaction economy,” such as hospitality and those non-essential businesses, to exist, i.e., people who are paid by or receive a large percentage of their income from those industries and industries related to or dependent upon them. The calculus of this lock-down on the economy generally, and these specific sectors of the economy in particular, was supposedly always a consideration, although it is becoming increasingly obvious that it was not given full examination by those with the power to impose the lock-downs. A simple trade-off was presented: “Put a little strain on a few industries now, and save lives as a result.”

However, and this is the worrisome case, if flattening the curve via social distancing does not result in fewer deaths, which it could only do in the event that hospitals were overwhelmed, then the best-case result of the approach is to only increase ‘Societal Exposure Time’. The net effect of supposedly flattening the curve, assuming the curve was actually flattened, could actually be looked upon as wasted time, while people dependent on the interaction economy and/or unlucky enough to work in an ostensibly non-essential sector have limited, reduced, or no income—along with all the related secondary and tertiary industries who supply or are served by them. From much of the reporting, the vast majority of hospitals were not overwhelmed.

One could even argue if the healthcare establishment would have been overwhelmed without ostensibly flattening the curve. While it is possible that in some places, such as New York City or Detroit, social distancing had some effect, it is equally likely, nay probable, that some social distancing, without lockdowns, would have sufficed almost everywhere else. Moreover, what if the progression of COVID-19 through the population was unaffected by social distancing? Every year the flu comes and goes and not everyone gets it. This, despite almost no social distancing practices and despite the fact that not everyone gets vaccinated, all without machinations such as lock-downs imposed on the public and marketed with puffery such as, “Stay Home and Save a Life.” By virtually any evaluation then, flattening the curve via social distancing had almost no net positive effect for the majority of the United States! Zilch. Zip. Zero. Bupkis.

Even if these draconian lock-downs did have a positive effect, (and that is a big-assed IF) the time for them is long over. The increased ‘Societal Exposure Time’ has turned directly into massive negative economic impact across multiple sectors of the economy. And let us be clear, this negative economic impact is not about rich dudes going on fewer vacations, it is about the people who previously depended upon the interaction economy—that ecosystem of businesses, one of them the hospitality and restaurant sector and another of them the supposedly non-essential sector—for income to eat and pay bills. Those people are part of the over twenty-five million people who have gone from working to unemployed over a few weeks as a result of those lock-downs.

Will they find new employment quickly? Will businesses closed in the wreckage of bungled government approach to COVID-19 rapidly re-open? Who knows? Doubtful on both counts. Built into the supposed calculus of flattening the curve via social distancing was the horribly simplified and sound-byte-ready idea and/or belief that “saving lives trumps worrying about any negative economic effects.” The negative side of that calculus was evidently never fully grasped, particularly in the event that flattening the curve via social distancing did not result in markedly fewer deaths, which it did not.

This is exactly where we are today in the United States: massive negative economic impact and still no obvious plan to immediately remove the government-imposed lock-downs. Little (if any) benefit, but all the pain—with more pain on the horizon. The fact that many government leaders are taking a measured, pensive approach to ending the lock-downs and thereby un-doing what they did with knee-jerking half-assery is laughable. The government-mandated lock-downs should end just as quickly as they were implemented. That none of the losers who imposed them is likely to apologize for any of the irreparable damage done to society is par for the course.

Wilt Alston

 

 

 

 

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Notes From the French Confinement – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on April 22, 2020

I have watched several hours of coverage of Covid-19 on French television, including speeches by President Macron and Prime Minister Philipe, and interviews with many, many doctors and scientists. I have not seen a single mention of natural immunity; not a single mention of diet, supplements, nor sunshine. Perhaps of all the literal crimes committed by the authorities, this crime of omission by them, the healthcare community and by the media could be the worst.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/ira-katz/notes-from-the-french-confinement/

By

I am in confinement in France. There has been so much written about the Covid-19 crisis there hardly seems anything new to write about. Certainly most of what is presented in the mainstream I disagree with compared to the excellent reporting found on LRC. I also learn a lot from others such as James Corbett, Robert Wenzel and the Bionic Mosquito. But here I report on my observations from France that might be of interest to the international LRC audience.

First a positive story. The word for a crow (the black bird) in French is corbeau. But in familiar French a corbeau is a person who makes an anonymous denunciation to the authorities. In the context of the Covid-19 crisis this practice consists of calls to the police to report on people violating social distancing rules. In the US just look at Mayor de Blasio of New York. However, in France there is a vastly different approach. As this article from the newspaper Le Monde reports, due to the lasting memories of the denouncements of Jews and the resistance during the German occupation there is social pressure not to denounce people. But officially, even the police have stated they do not want to receive these calls; noting that it is often neighbors who already have had problematic relations who denounce each other. Some hard lessons are learned.

Living just outside Paris I have a lot of experience with extremely dark winters. Paris is very far north, at latitude 48.8566N similar to Montreal. In January I often arrive at work in the night and leave when night has returned. Furthermore, the sun hardley shines in the winter due to the maritime climate in Paris during this season. I had been convinced many years ago by the LRC writers Sardi, Brownstein, etc. that improving immunity by taking vitamin D is the key to preventing the flu. In France vitamins are not readily available over the counter. I need a prescription from a doctor to get my vitamin D. My current doctor prescribes for me one dose of 80,000 IU every three months. It is in liquid form and comes in an ampoule (glass bulb).

My practice, in spite of the doctor’s prescription, is to take an ampoule the fist of December, January, and February for protection during the winter. Since I started this practice about five-years-ago I have hardly had a sniffle. This year I continued in March to daily take 2000 IU tablets I had purchased in the US. That is until the weather turned to glorious spring sunshine. So now I sit on the balcony in the sun in lieu of the tablets. About four weeks ago my wife started to have symptoms of Covid-19 (or the flu, see below) consisting of a slight fever and diarrhea. I gave her my extra ampoule of vitamin D, and the tablets daily. Her symptoms were gone after the first day. We did not quarantine her in our apartment as it was not feasible in any event. My daughter has a slight rash that could be symptomatic of the virus. I have been symptom free.

I have watched several hours of coverage of Covid-19 on French television, including speeches by President Macron and Prime Minister Philipe, and interviews with many, many doctors and scientists. I have not seen a single mention of natural immunity; not a single mention of diet, supplements, nor sunshine. Perhaps of all the literal crimes committed by the authorities, this crime of omission by them, the healthcare community and by the media could be the worst. It  would be so simple to help so many people by following the advice of a physician like Dr. Brownstein without changing any other practice and with only a tiny pittance of cost. Heck, just to advise, sitting on the balcony in the sunshine could do so much more for healthcare workers than clapping at 8 PM.

A particular problem in the US is the incredible divisiveness over Trump. An illustration of this from the French perspective is the media scrutiny of the chloroquine treatment. In this US article reporting negative results the lead is that chloroquine is “Trump touted.” Trump has nothing to do with this particular study or whether or not chloroquine is a good idea. As Trump is the worst possible leader to the resistance, Emmanuel Macron might be the best example of a modern, technocratic leader to the same people who hate Trump. Yet this article shows that Macron is perhaps much more enthusiastic about chloroquine than Trump. I think this kind of comparison could be helpful to treat otherwise intelligent and well intentioned people of Trump derangement syndrome.

By profession I am a research scientist/engineer. Thus, I am very comfortable researching scientific literature. When the Covid-19 crisis became imminent I did a brief overview and came across this apropos article in PLOSone from 2012: Characterization of Human Coronavirus Etiology in Chinese Adults with Acute Upper Respiratory Tract Infection by Real-Time RT-PCR Assays. The key line in the paper is “Undifferentiated human rhinoviruses and influenza (Flu) A were the most common viruses detected (more than 35%) in HCoV co-infections.”  And more, “Our study also suggested that all non-SARS-associated HCoVs contribute significantly to URTI in adult patients in China.” My takeaway was that coronavirus is understood to be part of the normal cold and flu season, coexisting with other viruses. In fact, to differentiate the symptoms of Covid, that is, what virus is causing what symptom, is very difficult to do. This paper led me to believe that most likely this was perhaps a bad year, but otherwise typical of the flu season that includes the various flu strains including corona viruses. While the ultimate data might change my opinion, up until now this view has been reinforced in the passing weeks.

I have mentioned in a previous LRC piece the French principe de precaution, which in effect has been the response of the world’s governments. What I have not heard is the classical, but seemingly forgotten, bioethics dictum, first do no harm. So we wait here, like people are waiting around the world, for the following waves of harm caused by government actions. President Macron has given us the target of May 11th for the end of the confinement period, but it will be a progressive restart. So we are still unsure what we will be able to do when, as far as work and school are concerned. And perhaps most important for the French people, what vacations will be possible!

Finally, my hope for the LRC community is to Stay Free while trying to Stay Safe.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

 

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

950AD: “Viking sailing ships return to port; violation of social distancing” « Jon Rappoport’s Blog

Posted by M. C. on April 20, 2020

It doesn’t require putting your life on a  microchip.

It doesn’t require faceless bureaucrats justifying their jobs by issuing inane, unconstitutional laws.

It doesn’t require unmasked, blowhard politicians bloviating nonsense to justify their jobs.

It doesn’t require tracking your movements, recording your private conversations, controlling you nor controlling the minutia of your life.

It doesn’t require feeding $billions to medical and big pharma cronies.

It doesn’t offer a diversion nor excuse for the coming recession.

It doesn’t offer “if it bleeds it leads” headlines.

There is a reason keeping your body and your immune system in good working order is never mentioned.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/04/17/950ad-viking-sailing-ships-violation-social-distancing/

Jon Rappoport

…George Carlin, 1999: “What we have now is a completely neurotic
population… Where did this sudden fear of germs come from in this
country? Have you noticed this? The media, constantly running stories
about all the latest infections – salmonella, e-coli, hanta virus, bird
flu – and Americans, they panic easily so now everybody’s running
around, scrubbing this and spraying that and overcooking their food and
repeatedly washing their hands, trying to avoid all contact with germs.
It’s ridiculous and it goes to ridiculous lengths… bunch of goddamn
pussies! Besides, what do you think you have an immune system for? It’s
for killing germs!… Let me tell you a true story about immunization
okay? When I was a little boy in New York City in the 1940s, we swam in
the Hudson River and it was filled with raw sewage okay? We swam in raw
sewage! You know… to cool off! And at that time, the big fear was polio;
thousands of kids died from polio every year but you know something? In
my neighbourhood, no one ever got polio! No one! Ever! You know why?
Cause we swam in raw sewage! It strengthened our immune systems! The
polio never had a prayer; we were tempered in raw shit! So personally, I
never take any special precautions against germs. I don’t shy away from
people that sneeze and cough, I don’t wipe off the telephone, I don’t
cover the toilet seat, and if I drop food on the floor, I pick it up and
eat it! Yes I do. Even if I’m at a sidewalk café! In Calcutta! The poor
section! On New Year’s morning during a soccer riot! And you know
something? In spite of all that so-called risky behaviour, I never get
infections, I don’t get them, I don’t get colds, I don’t get flu, I
don’t get headaches, I don’t get upset stomach, you know why? Cause I
got a good strong immune system and it gets a lot of practice…”

Be seeing you

Conformity Isn't a Recipe for Excellence: Wisdom from ...

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

Under order, face masks mandatory for workers in PA

Posted by M. C. on April 16, 2020

Why wait until we are at/past the peak?

Why do I see no masks?

Why do all three of these people need to be there in a group? Aren’t they special!

I guess the point is to make the unwashed masses think you know what you are doing.

https://www.wkbn.com/news/coronavirus/under-order-face-masks-mandatory-for-workers-in-pa/

by:

Pennsylvania Secretary of Health Dr. Rachel Levine, flanked by Gov. Tom Wolf and Department of Education Secretary Pedro Rivera, provides an update on the coronavirus known as COVID-19 on Thursday, March 12, 2020.

Pennsylvania Secretary of Health Dr. Rachel Levine, flanked by Gov. Tom Wolf and Department of Education Secretary Pedro Rivera, provides an update on the coronavirus known as COVID-19 on Thursday, March 12, 2020. (Joe Hermitt/The Patriot-News via AP)

HARRISBURG (WKBN) – Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf announced an order Wednesday, requiring those who work in the state to wear masks and take other social distancing actions in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Pennsylvania Department of Health Secretary Dr. Rachel Levine signed an order that directs businesses that have maintained in-person operations to protect their workers by providing face masks and making it a mandatory requirement at the worksite. Businesses also must stagger stop and start times for employees, when able to, to prevent gatherings of groups…

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

 

 

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