The Pandemic State Is Here to Stay

In a major essay for Hillsdale College’s Imprimis series, Michael Rectenwald points to the 2018 CLADE X and 2019 Event 201 pandemic simulations involving putatively benign collaborations between the World Economic Forum, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

These exercises eerily “anticipated almost every eventuality of the actual Covid crisis, most notably the responses by governments, health agencies, the media, tech companies, and elements of the public. The responses and their effects,” he continues, “included worldwide lockdowns, the collapse of businesses and industries, the adoption of biometric surveillance technologies, an emphasis on social media censorship to combat ‘misinformation,’ the flooding of social and legacy media with ‘authoritative sources,’ widespread riots, and mass unemployment,” including the record gains enjoyed by companies like Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google entailing a massive transfer of wealth from the lower-and-middle stratum to the top echelon.

Similarly, writing in EarthNewspaper, Gary Barnett has no doubt that an “environment of deception” has been created and an enormous boondoggle perpetrated by a global network of royals, politicians, Big Tech moguls, Big Pharma, billionaires, and other elites, including Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum and its legion of influential graduates. The evidence he assembles is damning: area-variation mortality counts, suggesting differing batches of vaccines for experimental purposes; inflation of Covid casualty numbers; promotion of the killer drug Remdesivir; hospitals monetarily incentivized to report Covid cases and deaths, leading to a statistical explosion; and the use of ventilators, which produced mortality rates varying for different age groups from 76.4 percent to 97.2 percent.

Distress signal.

Clearly, the authorities went about their business in the most unproductive and dangerous manner conceivable—but this is only to give them the benefit of the doubt. There is far more going on and far more at stake than most people realize, as former BlackRock portfolio manager and investor Edward Dowd has vividly exposed in a blockbuster interview with Naomi Wolf and a follow-up with Alex Jones. The BMJ reports that scientific progress has been “thwarted by the ownership of data and knowledge because industry suppresses negative trial results [and] fails to report adverse events.” Scientific integrity has been radically compromised. The evidence of fraud is both mind-blowing and undeniable. It should be glaringly obvious by this time that a tectonic shift in medical, corporate, economic and power paradigms has occurred before our very eyes.

The new social and political structure that has come about is what law professor Bruce Pardy calls the “pandemic managerial state,” which runs roughshod over every Constitutional or legal bulwark. His conclusion is demoralising, to say the least: “The Covid-19 regime is just the tip of the iceberg. It is based upon an ideological premise: individual sovereignty must yield to the expertise, authority and discretion of officials acting in the name of public welfare and progressive causes.”

The real question is whether we will ever return to “normal,” to life as we once felt and experienced it, and the answer is: No, at least not in our lifetimes. We have Klaus Schwab’s word for it in Covid-19: The Great Reset.

“Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal,” he writes. “The short response is: never. The world as we knew it in the early months of 2020 is no more.”

He is correct.

The governing elect and their enablers—the medical colleges and the media—still have the support of a substantial portion of the public: the elite classes and the financially insulated on the one hand, the parasitical, financially-recipient classes on the other. Their authoritarian grip on power will be hard to dislodge. Even after the pandemic is officially declared over, the public will remain fearful and politically tenderized. Irrational attitudes fostered by the authorities will persist. Millions will continue wearing masks for years to come.

Public venues like restaurants will be prone to continue enforcing vaccine protocols. Many will continue to blame the unvaccinated for a failed vaccine, ensuring virulent social divisions. Meanwhile, the official and media narrative, that pervasive machinery of lies, will credit the mask/lockdown/vaccination program for having defeated the pandemic when it was the very mandate policy itself that caused incalculable harm and prolonged the disaster.

Say no more.

In many countries a majority of citizens obligingly fall for the great swindle. In his seminal essay Discours de la servitude volontaire, generally rendered in English as The Politics of Obedience, the 16th-century political philosopher Étienne de la Boétie cogently analysed the dynamic in play. “What strange affair is this?” he asks. “To see a vast multitude of people not merely obeying, but welcoming servility… deprived of the bulk of their revenues, their fields plundered, their dwellings robbed?”

His basic insight is that despotism owes its hegemony primarily to popular acceptance. There seems to be no help for it, except in those rare historical cases where a “spirited people” rises up against their ruthless leaders and expels “the villainous dross of the nation,” thus refusing “to give consent to their own woe.” [My translation.] Regrettably, in most Western nations today, there are simply not enough Trucker Convoys intent on restoring their rights and freedoms, too many people who give consent to their own servitude, too many non-truckers on the road to serfdom.

The “pandemic state” is here to stay for the indefinite future, though in different manifestations. Political authority has devolved into one or another form of totalitarian governance, characterized by disparate structures of repression as they arise across the political spectrum. In his must-read Scanned: Why Vaccine Passports and Digital IDs Will Mean the End of Privacy and Personal Freedom, Nick Corbishley exposes the technology of population control, showing that a return to normality is a mere fantasy.

Read it and weep.

No new virus need emerge. Pandemic psychology controls the public mind and pandemic policy has prepared the way for a new political order—Schwab’s “global strategic framework of governance,” that is, a fascist regime in all but name. The norms and customs we took for granted will not return. Metaphorically, it is as if someone who has been severely wounded or disfigured must still bear the scars and impediments of his trauma. The handicap is here to stay.

Moreover, far too many people seem to love their injury. There is no going back to a previous condition of comparative innocence and social flexibility. The state will continue to further corrode traditional liberties—privacy, assembly, mobility, communication, currency—towards the goal of citizen submission to a dominant citadel of power, an administrative panopticon. And as de la Boétie understood, the majority will willingly comply, the paradoxical source of their own affliction. The lockdown state has the blessing of the multitudes. When exfiltration is not possible, there is little option for the remnant but to resist inwardly and refuse to give consent to their political abusers.

The heritage of the Judeo-Christian West, based on faith in a higher power, the rule of law, and the sovereignty of the individual, has been decisively breached. We now inhabit a time of domestic menace. For those who continue to cherish their liberty, the best we can do is plan and cope.

Suffer the Little Children, Yet Again

In the late Arthur C. Clarke’s most popular novel Childhood’s End, an interstellar species called the Overlords descends upon Earth to carry out a cosmic mission, namely, to rescue mankind from impending extinction and ensure the survival of a transformed humanity in an alien paradise, an ethereal garden of Eden among the stars. The Overlords act as a bridge between a future humanity represented by the children and the universal Overmind into which human consciousness will eventually merge.

As events move to their conclusion, the race of children, who have been quarantined, prepare for the final stage of human evolution into the single, collective intelligence which is the Overmind. They ascend in a pillar of fire, the earth vaporizes, and the evolutionary spiral continues to its exoplanetary conclusion.

It's here.

Is something similar occurring today, on a more limited and morbidly political level, where the Overlords comprise an elite class of government officials, medical agencies and non-state actors associated with what is known as The Great Reset, intent on remaking the humanity of children through pandemic policies, including vaccination?

Children do not need to be vaccinated. They are effectively immune to the virus and do not statistically figure in the casualty numbers, which in any case have been demonstrably inflated. According to our most highly accredited specialists in the fields of epidemiology and immunology, “for younger people, the risk of severe disease—already low before Omicron—is miniscule.” Children are overwhelmingly safe—from infection, if not from conscription. One can find Tweets insisting on child infections, but Twitter is not known as a fount of distributed intelligence or scientific accuracy. 

The inventor of mRNA technology Dr. Robert Malone has put the matter succinctly and alarmingly:

Many things that our public health system demanded we do to our children directly harmed them. Self-harm, suicide and drug abuse in children have taken off all around the world. Anxiety, bullying, intimidation, coercion have become the norm. Measured IQ in the very young has dropped. Fundamental childhood delays are easily measured...These genetic vaccines can damage your children. They may damage their brain, their heart, their immune system and their ability to have children in the future. And many of these types of damages cannot be repaired.

The short-term effects are already evident, but it may get worse. “Only with the passage of time will we know what long-term damage may occur."

Clarke (1917-2008) at home in Sri Lanka.

Similarly, the Early Childhood Development Action Network, pointing out that the early years are a “critical window of rapid brain development that lays the foundation for health, well-being and productivity throughout life,” is concerned that the pandemic—actually, pandemic policy—puts “children at great risk of not reaching their full potential.”

Will we be raising a generation, as Dr. Malone fears, whose emotional formation has been stunted, whose intelligence has plummeted—in the case of infants by almost two standard deviations—and many of whom may have been rendered infertile? Are we observing another manifestation of childhood’s end?

The question is unavoidable. Why the children? Of course, there is a profit motive at work in promoting child vaccination, as James O’Keefe’s interview with FDA executive Christopher Cole makes amply clear, despite the glaring lack of safety data. A multi-billion-dollar scam is in play, which former BlackRock portfolio manager and investor Edward Dowd vividly exposes. One can never leave filthy lucre out of the equation.

But money doesn’t explain everything; there is more than one trail leading to motive, including the passion for amassing power. There does seem to be a larger agenda at work: the recruiting of children into a movement that, at the cost of creating immense harm, may incorporate them into an unimaginable but contrived future of controlled, dis-empowered, and surveilled citizens. Many fear that children are being injected with biological markers to facilitate future contact tracing, although no proof of this hypothesis has been forthcoming as yet. 

I do not profess to know with certainty why toddlers and children from six months to twelve years of age have been targeted for vaccination. My (former) doctor contended that children needed to be inoculated in order to protect their elders. But as Stacy Lennox writes in PJ Media, “Only a genuinely demented society burdens children to make adults feel safe”—especially when one considers that these elders are already vaccinated, and that, in any case, protection declines rapidly.

When does it stop?

Whatever the reason or reasons may be—profit, eugenics, fearfulness, ideology—it may not signal childhood’s end so much as the end of responsible adulthood, both now and in the future as children grow into their majority. My suspicions have been aroused that something unholy is in the works, a macabre version of science fiction ruminations that have been made palpable in the real world.

Is there actually some ulterior purpose? Does the Great Reset’s plan to remake the global political structure from the top down play a role in what otherwise makes no rational sense? For the project of child vaccination may be obscenely lucrative but it does not compass the entire range of possibilities.

Arthur C. Clarke produced a work of masterful fiction. A malign version of the plot may now be in effect as the race of Vaccidians from the ideological cosmos descend upon our children, grooming them for absorption into a new reset world.

THE COLUMN: 'Events, Dear Boy, Events'

And so, just like that, Covid hysteria has suddenly receded, the manifest limitations of "green energy" have revealed themselves, and "gun control" suddenly doesn't seem so urgent in light of plucky little Ukraine's citizen-soldiers. Inflation is soaring, pocketbook issues are back on the table, and the outbreak of a real shooting war in the Ukraine, in which people are fighting and dying, has suddenly yanked the word "catastrophic" back from the realm of mental illness and into reality. As the late British prime minister Harold Macmillan is supposed to have replied when asked what was his greatest challenge: "Events, dear boy, events."

Amazing what happens when reality bites. The small stuff, the transient concerns, the self-indulgence in lunacy and cultural suicide suddenly slips away, revealing bedrock truths beneath. The prolonged propaganda assault by the national media, led by the unabashedly racialist New York Times, on the traditions and institutions of this country has screeched to a halt as people stare in disbelief at supermarket receipts and gas pump prices and watch the shelling of Kiev on their televisions. Perhaps now words like "assault" and "hostile environment" won't be thrown around with such gay abandon:

So much for the dreaded "assault" rifles, which now seem to have some usefulness after all. Note as well that these "assault" rifles aren't firing themselves, but are instead wielded by responsible adults in an actual hostile environment in defense of their lives, their families, and their homelands—exactly the conditions under which the Congress and the several states ratified the second amendment.

Vladimir Putin's aims have been clear for decades to anyone who knew anything about Russian history. Raised in the Soviet Union, he regarded the collapse of his country as a great tragedy, but he is not trying to restore anything like the U.S.S.R. Rather, his ambition is to reanimate the Rodina of Tsar Alexander, the scourge of Napoleon who also played a large part in the formation of modern Europe at the Congress of Vienna. To that end, he has cemented an alliance with the Russian Orthodox Church—the historic soul and animating spirit of the country—which forms, along with the coterie of gangsters that emerged from the ruins of the KGB, his power base.

He's long had his eyes on Kiev, in many ways the heart of Mother Russia but unfortunately for him occupied by his Slavic cousins, the Ukrainians who, having experienced the Soviet Union, have little desire to re-unite. Like Poland, Ukraine lives in a bad neighborhood between two ugly neighbors, Germany and Russia , one in which the borders keep switching around. But the foolish American notion of pushing the moribund corpse of NATO eastward, into Albania, Bulgaria, and the Baltics has been seen by Putin and the Russians as both a humiliation and a provocation.

"Climate change," too, has been back-benched for a while. Not a peep out of the usual suspects complaining about all the carbon emissions from the land and air power unleashed on the Ukraine by Putin and the sorry shambles of the once-formidable Red Army as their genuine assault on a neighboring sovereign nation has seemed to sputter. But never fear, intrepid eco-warriors such as John "Mr. 16 Weeks in Nam" Kerry, who racked up more medals-per-hour than Audie Murphy, are here to keep the focus where it belongs:

And to think that this man was almost president of the United States. Then again, an even bigger fool currently sits in the Oval Office. Like Kerry, Joe Biden is a lifelong government functionary with no real-world experience but a huge chip on his shoulder over what he perceives as non-recognition of his genius. Biden is that Irish archetype, the braggart on the far barstool mouthing off and trying to provoke the real men of the community into taking a poke at him. The more they ignore him, the angrier he gets. Until reality slaps him in the face.

What is Biden to make, then, of his abysmal approval ratings, his demolition of the American economy in order to satisfy his "green" saboteur/enablers, and his consummate ineptitude at handling the levers of government except signing "executive orders" shoved under this nose by chief of staff Ron Klain. With his first act in office, the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, Biden suddenly threw the booming Trump economy into reverse without even hitting the clutch, causing the engine to conk out. By choking off energy supplies—the lifeblood of the economy—in order to appease the Luddite god of the malevolent Greens, Biden has now been reduced to begging other countries, including Russia, into selling us oil. How's that for diplomacy?

All but the most demented Democrats, however, hate personal privation, so now of course there are calls to restart the pipeline again. Forget the former fretting over the environment and "public health"—the all-purpose excuse for punitive fascism these days. Ah, but how some outfit calling itself the "Natural Resources Defense Council" crowed just thirteen months ago:

The takedown of the notorious Keystone XL (KXL) tar sands pipeline will go down as one of this generation’s most monumental environmental victories. After more than 10 years of tenacious protests, drawn-out legal battles, and flip-flopping executive orders spanning three presidential administrations, the Keystone XL pipeline is now gone for good. The project’s corporate backer—the Canadian energy infrastructure company TC Energy—officially abandoned the project in June 2021 following President Joe Biden’s denial of a key permit on his first day in office. But the path to victory wasn’t always clear.

Many had hoped that the disastrous project was finally done for in November 2015, when the Obama administration vetoed the pipeline—acknowledging its pervasive threats to climate, ecosystems, drinking water sources, and public health. But immediately after taking office, President Donald Trump brought the zombie project back to life, along with the legal battles against it. By the time President Biden took office in 2021, ready to fulfill his campaign promise to revoke the cross-border permit, the dirty energy pipeline had become one of the foremost climate controversies of our time.

That was then, this is now:

Friday, U.S. Sen. Steve Daines (R-Montana) called on the Biden administration to immediately restart the Keystone XL pipeline project. “President Biden set us on a dangerous path when he decided to kill the Keystone XL pipeline on Day One in office. What’s happening in Russia and Europe is a stark reminder of the need to support American energy development, not hinder it. Energy security is national security, and a global energy dominant America is a safer world. Biden must restart the Keystone XL pipeline now.”

A spokesperson for Montana’s other U.S. senator, Jon Tester (D-Montana), said, “Senator Tester was Montana’s leading champion for the Keystone Pipeline for more than a decade, and he was bitterly disappointed when the project was canceled. Senator Tester will continue to work aggressively to support responsible natural resource development that will create good-paying Montana jobs, secure our energy independence, and defend our national security.”

This push from Daines comes as oil prices jumped to $100 a barrel this week, as tensions escalate between Russia and Ukraine.

Which brings us to the latest, highly politicized "thinking" on the Left regarding the prolonged and by now thoroughly tiresome Covid hoax. Via the power of the media, a standard coronavirus (akin to the flu) with a 99 percent survival rate, and which claimed the majority of its victims from the ranks of the elderly and the morbidly obese, was transformed into the Black Death, and unleashed an army of meddlesome, fearful Karens upon the nation. Now that the transparent falsity of the claims the government made for the virus and for the efficacy of the vaccines is beginning to sink in, suddenly the "science" is not so settled after all, and maybe it's time we—you guessed it—declared victory and pulled out.

These are addressed to a man who just two months ago gleefully threatened a winter of "severe illness and death" on the unvaccinated. Instead, predictably, now that Heisenberg has left the building Covid has essentially vanished. But for the past two years, we had the luxury of obsessing about a passing illness that posed almost no danger to most of us, but did hand the government the tools to lock us down, create health passports, restrict the free movement of peoples, and abrogate the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech, assembly, and religion.

And whaddya know? No more mask mandates on Capitol Hill for Brandon's big State of the Union speech tomorrow night!

The US Capitol's attending physician said Sunday that masks will be optional on Capitol Hill starting Monday, just a day before President Joe Biden will deliver his State of the Union address in the House chamber. Citing new guidance from US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Brian P. Monahan said in a memo that "individuals may choose to mask at any time, but it is no longer a requirement."

"New guidance." Thanks, but Real Americans have had just about enough of governmental "guidance." A bright shining lie, as I wrote in these pages not long ago. You know they're just itching to do it again, but we need to make one thing perfectly clear: no more "mandates," ever.

Even Saturday Night Live is making fun of them. So you know this prank is running out of steam.

"There is a great deal of ruin in a nation," observed Adam Smith in the 18th century. But how much ruin, exactly? Russia is testing that proposition now, and the United States under Biden is not far behind. Events, dear boy, events.

Canada: Fascist or Communist?

The lifting of the Emergencies Act is an enormous relief to all liberty-loving Canadians, but the fact that it could have been invoked on demonstrably flimsy grounds—for a peaceful protest in which no violence or property damage occurred—demonstrates the lawless lengths the Justin Trudeau government will go to secure total power. Perhaps the Act was a test to gauge the reaction of Canadians, many of whom accepted it supinely. Perhaps it was withdrawn because it appeared set to be revoked by the Senate. According to No More Lockdowns Canada, the reason may have had something to do with “an abrupt loss of institutional confidence in the banking system.”

Whatever the case, the willingness to suspend peaceful citizens’ liberties so harshly demonstrates the autocratic impulses of the ruling party. In innumerable articles, blogs and podcasts I’ve consulted over the last few turbulent weeks, the government has been variously described as fascist or communist. The terms are used interchangeably. An acquaintance recently asked which would be the proper designation.

The red queen.

As Mussolini wrote in The Doctrine of Fascism, “The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporate, social, and educational institutions.” Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s recent directives under the Emergencies Act were wholly fascist in nature, to wit: 

First: we are broadening the scope of Canada’s anti-money laundering and terrorist financing rules so that they cover crowdfunding platforms and the payment service providers they use. These changes cover all forms of transactions, including digital assets such as cryptocurrencies. Second: the government is issuing an order with immediate effect, under the Emergencies Act, authorizing Canadian financial institutions to temporarily cease providing financial services where the institution suspects that an account is being used to further the illegal blockades and occupations.

Obviously, the freezing of bank accounts would proceed without a court order. The corporations and financial and social institutions seem eager to comply. The definition of “illegal,” of course, is moot, a tyrannical expedient.

Canada has also adopted the top-down, social credit and contact tracing system practiced by Communist China, a country it is rapidly coming to resemble. Justin Trudeau made no secret of his admiration for the Chinese “basic dictatorship”: “There’s a level of admiration I actually have for China. Their basic dictatorship is actually allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime.” Indeed, Trudeau invited the Chinese military to train in Canada. (The site chosen for cold-weather maneuvers was Petawawa, Ontario.) Fascist Venezuela and communist Cuba are also major influences and templates. 

Which is it, then, fascist or communist? The answer is both, for the distinction is fundamentally irrelevant. Both are totalitarian entities, defined as systems of government that are centralized and autocratic and that demand total subservience to the state—hence “totalitarian.” Jonah Goldberg made the point eloquently in his Liberal Fascism. There is no paradox. As Paul Gottfried writes in Fascism: The Career of a Concept, “Totalitarianism is defined as a twentieth-century problem that is illustrated most dramatically by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia…Hitler and Stalin were not ideological opposites but similar dangers to human freedom.”

Besties.

If there is a difference between the two totalitarian ideologies, it pertains to the relation between state and corporation: the communist system is a sealed unit in which state and corporation are one and the same; the fascist system uses the corporation as a semi-independent institution to be manipulated and controlled. Between one and the other falls the shadow of not much.

The issue of whether Canada in its current manifestation is fascist or communist is therefore immaterial. It is both, owing to the habitual governing practice of the Trudeaus. Invoking the War Measures Act to deal with national emergencies that are not national emergencies seems to run in the Trudeau family. During the 1970 “October Crisis,” Trudeau père applied the measure to disable, as Nationalist Passions puts it, “an informal group, organized in small, autonomous cells [that] had no more than thirty-five members.” In 2022, Trudeau fils invoked the successor Emergencies Act to crush a peaceful trucker convoy protest and shut down banking privileges of both protestors and those who contributed to the trucker fund, retroactively made illegal. 

“Getting rid of troublemakers en masse,” Gottlieb writes, “would help to advance the common project imposed by the leader,” consisting of control over the economy and public life, “a monopoly over all forms of communication” (Cf. Bill C-10), and the crushing of political dissent and fractious minorities. Sound familiar? What we are witnessing is a dynasty on the make and a country on the skids.

Père Pierre?

The Emergencies Act may have ben revoked, but the federal Covid mandates and restrictions, which the Freedom Convoy originally protested, are still on the books. Moreover, the truckers have lost their licences and operating insurance and many have lost their rigs. Their livelihoods have been destroyed. Some continue to languish in jail without bail. These are the wages of a peaceful protest that broke no laws, despite the misinformation and disinformation that is Justin Trudeau’s stock-in-trade.

We should not, then, be distracted by irrelevant distinctions and scholarly niceties. Whether the government is fascist or communist is moot. Under the current administration, a working coalition between two far-left parties, the Liberals and the enclitic NDP, Canada bears all the hallmarks of a repressive, oligopolist state that is laboring to permanently entrench itself. The Trudeaus have seen to that. Canadians have elected them on multiple occasions and, with the exception of those whose minds have not dimmed—a minority, be it said—Canadians have reaped the country they deserve. Mutatis mutandis, we now live under the boot of a communofascist regime and, barring some unforeseen change, we will all suffer for it.

Justin Trudeau Revokes Emergencies Act

Breaking news: Justin Trudeau announced this afternoon that he is revoking the Emergencies Act, just two days after getting it passed in the House of Commons. From The National Post:

Trudeau credited the end of the downtown Ottawa protests with cabinet’s decision to revoke the measures, a move he said was needed to end the illegal occupation and clear streets from dozens of parked vehicles and big rigs. “We are confident that existing laws and bylaws are now sufficient to keep people safe,” Trudeau said during the press conference, adding Ottawa will continue supporting local police and authorities

This is good news, of course, but it is also worth noting that his justification for this move makes exactly zero sense. "Existing laws and bylaws" were always sufficient to keep people safe while handling the protestors in Ottawa just as they were sufficient to deal with the border blockades some truckers set up for a time earlier in the protest. And the protests in Ottawa had already ended when Trudeau put the Emergencies Act up for a vote in parliament which was, let me reiterate, only two days ago.

So what has changed? Well, I think it is safe to assume that there were three pressure points which made Trudeau and the Liberals crack.

First, polling. Much was made as the protestors were being cleared out this past weekend of the polling which found that two-thirds of Canadians supported Trudeau's use of the Emergencies Act. But public polling since that time has been more divided. Very likely the images coming out of Ottawa of baton-wielding cops in riot gear getting rough with peaceful protestors and mounted officers trampling them made people more conflicted.

But even the initial poll requires a deeper reading. It also found the same percentage of people who supported Trudeau's measures saying they “fear for the future of Canada,” and nearly as many said, “they have lost faith in the ability of the country to keep peace, order and good government in place.” For a majority of Canadians, the protests had become an emblem of their country in chaos. Now that the protests are over, they are likely to turn on the man responsible. My guess is that that's exactly what Trudeau's internal polling is telling him.

Second, international opinion. Canadians are extremely proud of their standing in the international community. The smallest G7 country by a wide margin, Canada has long been known as a country that "punches above its weight." But the international reaction to Trudeau's handling of the protests has been brutal. The English speaking world has been treated to a long train of headlines slamming Trudeau and wondering how Canada could go so far down this path. "Trudeau’s Destructive ‘Emergency,’" "Justin Trudeau Has Disgraced His Office," "Police forces in Canada scrutinized for excessive violence with peaceful Freedom Convoy protesters,""Justin Trudeau's Ceauşescu Moment" (referring to Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu), and on and on. It was relentless. The CBC can cover for the prime minister all it wants. Sooner or later what the rest of the world is saying is going to bleed through.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly there is the upcoming Emergencies Act vote in the Canadian Senate. The senators had their first debate on the Act yesterday and many of them sounded reluctant to give the government a win:

Many wanted to know on what basis the government decided to invoke the Emergencies Act in the first place. That information has not been made available to Parliament, most notably ongoing investigations and intelligence information. Senator Dennis Glen Patterson said: “there is a certain amount of ‘trust us’ in the government’s justification of these extreme measures.”

“This is a serious step that we’re contemplating here today,” said Conservative Senator Elizabeth Marshall. “What exactly happened that the government decided to invoke the act? Because it seemed like for three or four weeks, there was nothing, they were just tolerating it.” She continued to ask why the government appeared “to be so late in assessing this monumental threat that they’re talking about.”

Conservative Senator Leo Housakos accused Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of stoking the “flames of division” in refusing to speak to the protesters who occupied the streets of Ottawa and calling them names such as “marchers with swastikas” and “defenders of Nazism.”

The potential humiliation of losing this historic vote in the senate was likely enough to convince Trudeau to revoke his use of the act. Senator Denise Batters, in particular, tore him apart in a wide-ranging speech on the senate floor which deserves to be watched in full.

Of course, this whole episode has been a humiliation for Trudeau and for Canada as well. It will dog him for the rest of his career, one that is hopefully cut short by the voters, who are sick and tired of being ruled by a tin-pot dictator.

THE COLUMN: From Behind the Unreasoning Mask

Thus spake Captain Ahab:

All visible objects, man, are but as pasteboard masks. But in each event — in the living act, the undoubted deed — there, some unknown but still reasoning thing puts forth the mouldings of its features from behind the unreasoning mask. If man will strike, strike through the mask! How can the prisoner reach outside except by thrusting through the wall? 

So now the mask slips and the truth is revealed: it was never about masks, or Covid, or "the science" at all. It was always—and always will be—about power. The Long March through the Institutions, the hallmark of the Frankfurt School's assault on the Western democracies, has now claimed its latest and thus far biggest prize. 

Who had the collapse of Canada as a functioning democracy on his bingo card? It was disheartening enough when Australia (with a "conservative" prime minister) fell, and that disarmed and benighted nation quickly transformed from the land of Mad Max and Crocodile Dundee back into the British penal colony it always was. 

But Canada? Granted, what became in 1867 the Dominion of Canada was comprised in part by American loyalists who rejected the separation from the motherland in the late 18th century and moved northward. Canadians also rightfully resented American incursions into their territory during the War of 1812 (a war much celebrated in Canada and totally ignored in the United States as the embarrassing mess it was). But since then, Canada has been America's closest ally. Canadians have long distinguished themselves in war, especially during World War I, where their service at Passchendaele, Ypres, and the Somme has become the stuff of military legend. Until the pestiferous arrival of Justin Trudeau as prime minister, no two countries were closer or had a more amicable relationship than Canada and the U.S.

Who is that masked man, really?

Now, in the blink of an eye, that relationship has been imperiled by Trudeau's abrogation of representative, parliamentary democracy via his mini-Machtergreifung last week. In this outrageous and disgraceful action he has been aided and abetted by his deputy prime minister (and finance minister) Chrystia Freeland (Harvard, Rhodes scholar), whose journalist grandfather was reportedly a Nazi collaborator during the war. Coincidentally she is married to a reporter for the New York Times, and is a former journalist herself. Of Ukrainian descent on her mother's side, the steely, multi-lingual Freeland has emerged as She Who Brings Down the Hammer:

In her remarks following Trudeau's act of nation-destroying pique, she said this:

Around the world, liberal democracies have been facing serious and sustained threats. We may have thought – we may have hoped – that Canada would be spared. Over the past two and a half weeks, we have learned that it is not. This occupation and these blockades are causing serious harm to our economy, to our democratic institutions, and to Canada’s international standing... That is why our government is taking action. We are resolute and determined. These illegal blockades must and will end. What we are facing today is a threat to our democratic institutions, to our economy, and to peace, order, and good government in Canada. This is unacceptable. It cannot stand and it will not stand.

"Our democracy," indeed. A dedicated leftist, Freeland is a member of the board of trustees of the World Economic Forum, the most dangerous threat to real democracy and freedom in the world today. Led by Klaus Schwab, whose Strangelovian accent would make Laurence Olivier's demented dentist Dr. Szell blush, the WEF is the force behind the Great Reset, a cross between the dystopian visions of Orwell's 1984 and Huxley's Brave New World as run by Daddy Warbucks and Dr. Evil.

Like SPECTRE, Schwab and his Resetters (whose numbers include, of course, Britain's Prince Charles, the scion of a family of anglicized Germans who trace their lineage back to the houses of Hanover and Saxe-Coburg und Gotha), seek nothing less than global power and influence—and in fact have already achieved it:

The punitive reaction to the Freedom Convoy was only unexpected in its timing. While most Western governments have been relatively silent regarding Trudeau's sudden coup, the media has generally cheered, reflecting their Ivy League loathing of the working classes and their lip service to republican democracy. Just as they celebrated the fiery, "mostly peaceful" BLM and Antifa riots during the summer of 2020, so they've (baselessly, to use one of their favorite words) depicted the truckers as racists and Nazis, taking their cues in that regard from Trudeau himself. 

The Wall Street Journal naturally opposed the move: 

Protests aren’t emergencies, and Western leaders had better get used to handling civil disobedience firmly without traducing civil liberties. Mr. Trudeau criminalized a protest movement, deputizing financial institutions, without due process or liability, to find and freeze personal accounts of blockaders and anyone who helps them. These extraordinary measures are a needless abuse of power.

When the Emergencies Act was first passed, critics were assured “emergency powers can only be used when the situation is so drastic that no other law of Canada can deal with the situation.” In abusing these powers for a nonemergency, Mr. Trudeau crossed a democratic line. Canadians wanted the blockades to end, but it never should have come at the expense of the rule of law.

Amazingly, and to its credit, so did the editorial board of the New York Times, meekly defending the right of peaceful protest, something Trudeau, Jr., had once claimed to champion:

We disagree with the protesters’ cause, but they have a right to be noisy and even disruptive. Protests are a necessary form of expression in a democratic society, particularly for those whose opinions do not command broad popular support. Governments have a responsibility to prevent violence by protesters, but they must be willing to accept some degree of disruption by those seeking to be heard. The challenge for public officials — the same one faced by Minneapolis and other cities in 2020 during the protests after the murder of George Floyd — is to maintain a balance between public health and safety and a functioning society, with the right to free expression. Entertaining the use of force to disperse or contain legal protests is wrong. As Mr. Trudeau said in November 2020, in expressing his support of a yearlong protest by farmers in India that blocked major highways to New Delhi, “Canada will always be there to defend the right of peaceful protest.”

One of the obstacles to understanding the malign intentions of the Davoisie and its fellow travelers in this mésalliance of corporate leaders and government officials—one of the textbook characteristics of Fascism, along with the employment of private militias to subvert the democratic process—is the highly successful campaign the international Left has waged since the collapse of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact under exigent circumstances in 1941, mostly via the media, to convince you that National Socialist Germany and the international Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were somehow antithetical, when in fact they were two sides of the same hellish coin. The nickname "Nazi" (almost never used by the members of the NSDAP themselves) derives from the first two syllables of the German word for "national," and was used to distinguish National Socialists from the "Sozis" in common parlance. 

Today, the bonzes of the WEF hide behind their ostensible capitalism and stupefying wealth to deflect any notion that they are aligned and allied with the international Left: how can we be both pro-capitalist and pro-communist at the same time? (Maybe they should ask Davos regular and former Nazi collaborator, George Soros.)

The sad and sobering part is that some two-thirds of Canadians approve of the Trudeau government's curtailment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees freedom of conscience and religion; freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; freedom of peaceful assembly; and freedom of association. But as in Britain, Ireland, Australia, and the U.S. Canada's major media are strongly pro-government (as long as that government tilts left) and will not brook any opposition to their love of internationalism. If that means rights have to be shelved "for a limited time," well you know the old saw about omelets and eggs. It only took two years to end "two weeks to flatten the curve."

As Ahab says in the passage quoted above, from Chapter 36, "The Quarter-Deck," of Moby Dick: "If man will strike, strike through the dumb mask! How can the prisoner reach outside except by thrusting through the wall?"

How indeed? Especially when the wall strikes back.

Trudeau Invokes 'Emergencies Act'

Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau has decided to invoke the Emergencies Act to end the ongoing Freedom Convoy protests in Canada. He will submit the decision for the approval of parliament sometime this week. New Democrat leader Jagmeet Singh has already announced his party's intention to support the government, meaning that the prime minister will have the votes he needs.

"It is now clear that there are serious challenges to law enforcement's ability to effectively enforce the law," Trudeau told a news conference Monday afternoon. "It is no longer a lawful protest at a disagreement over government policy. It is now an illegal occupation. It's time for people to go home. This is about keeping Canadians safe, protecting people's jobs and restoring confidence in our institutions," he said.

The Emergencies Act is a successor to the War Measures Act, which was famously invoked only once during peacetime -- Pierre Trudeau, Justin's father, made use of it during the October Crisis of 1970, after FLQ terrorists kidnapped the deputy premier of Quebec and a British diplomat with the goal of achieving independence for Quebec. The Emergencies Act, like its predecessor, grants the prime minister authority to severely restrict civil liberties for a time in order to restore order and protect the national welfare, though it gives parliament somewhat greater oversight than the earlier legislation.

The Act also allows the central government to go after crowdfunding platforms, such as GiveSendGo, which has been collecting on behalf of the truckers. That site is currently down, perhaps as a result of hacking.

The fundraising website used to raise millions of dollars for a “Freedom Convoy” protest led by truckers against coronavirus restrictions in Canada is offline after reports of a possible hack that exposed donor information. On Monday, a screenshot of the GiveSendGo website featured an image from the Disney film “Frozen,” along with a ticker purporting to show the names, donation amounts and email addresses of people who helped support the cause. The image bore the words “GiveSendGo is now frozen,” along with a link describing raw donation data.

A video captured by Canadian Broadcasting Corp. News reporter Travis Dhanraj shows scrolling text addressed to “GiveSendGo Grifters and Hatriots.”

This act of pique, petulance, and impotent frustration is completely unnecessary. As Greg Taylor explains in Canada's National Post:

Section 3 of the Act defines a national emergency as “an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that … seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it.”

The protestors have been peaceful, and the blockaded bridges have already begun to clear with only a handful of arrests having taken place so far. Moreover, constitutionally, dealing with protestors is very much within the realm of provincial authority.

One thing that invoking the Emergencies Act does do, however, is create the potentiality for military involvement. Trudeau has said that he has no plans thus far to bring in the military. But the prime minister is desperate, and if marching the military into Ottawa to clear out the protestors will end this, he will absolutely do so and take what he likely thinks is a short term hit in his national standing to make the problem go away.

But another, more subtle but just as ominous, use of the Emergencies Act concerns the government's broad ability to regulate financial transactions. Global News reports on this announcement by Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland:

The government is issuing an order with immediate effect under the Emergencies Act authorizing Canadian financial institutions to temporarily cease providing financial services where the institution suspects that an account is being used to further the illegal blockades and occupations,” Freeland said. “This order covers both personal and corporate accounts.” She said the government is also now “directing Canadian financial institutions to review their relationships with anyone involved in the illegal blockades and report to the RCMP or CSIS.”

Federal institutions are also getting “new, broad authority” to share information on anyone suspected of involvement with the blockades with Canadian banks and financial institutions. “As of today, a bank or other financial service provider will be able to immediately freeze or suspend an account without a court order. In doing so, they will be protected against civil liability for actions taken in good faith,” Freeland said.

These are the types of powers governments have used since 9/11 to combat terrorism. It is unnerving to see them deployed against non-violent citizen protestors. The Canadian national anthem contains a prayer: "God keep our land, glorious and free." Such divine intervention might be warranted in the days to come.

THE COLUMN: 'The Whole World is Watching' *UPDATED*

In the anni horribiles of 1968-71, nearing the peak of the student protests against the Vietnam War and pretty much everything else, American streets resonated with the chant, "the whole world is watching." Watching as Chicago cops beat the college-age hippies and the yippies senseless on the streets of Chicago and arrested them en masse three years later as they gathered on the Mall in Washington. Watching as the protests metastasized and spread, taking down the Johnson administration and making the life of the Nixon administration hell.

It wasn't just in the United States, either. The year 1968 saw student unrest across Europe as well, toppling Charles De Gaulle in France by the following year and giving rise to the violent mobs of the Red Army Faction and other violent, loosely allied left-wing organizations working at the behest of the Soviet Union to destroy capitalism and undermine political stability across the Continent.

And now here we are again. Protests have broken out in both Europe and North America, led by the doughty Canadian truckers who have organized and implemented the Freedom Convoy that's currently occupying Ottawa, the capital, and was temporarily obstructing the busy Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ont., and Detroit. Their proximate cause is the immediate elimination of all the fascistic trappings of the Covid/Nanny State: the vaccines, the masks, the mandates, the travel restrictions, the whole stinking lot of them.

UPDATE: Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau has involved the 1988 "Emergencies Act," which allows the central government to take "special temporary measures that may not be appropriate in normal times" in order to to crack down on the protest.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Monday he will activate rarely used emergency powers, including cutting off financing, to end protests that have shut some border crossings and paralyzed parts of the capital. The government, saying the protests were damaging the economy and Canada's reputation as a reliable trading partner, introduced sweeping measures to support police forces and bring crowdfunding platforms under terror financing oversight.

The "Freedom Convoy" protests, started by Canadian truckers opposing a COVID-19 vaccinate-or-quarantine mandate for cross-border drivers, have drawn people opposed to Trudeau's policies on everything from pandemic restrictions to a carbon tax. "The blockades are harming our economy and endangering public safety," Trudeau told a news conference. "We cannot and will not allow illegal and dangerous activities to continue."

"Dangerous activities" such as peaceful protest... not to mention "temporary measures" like "two weeks to flatten the curve..."

END UPDATE

This time, however, it's not Boss Daley's Chicago PD and the D.C. cops facing off against the undesirables and deplorables—it's the former undesirables themselves, now at the apogee of their political power, who are trying to throttle people they never thought they would actually have to meet in the flesh instead of the abstract: the working class.

It is, of course, a sight for sore eyes. For the political, managerial, and laptop classes who are now in command of the guys wielding the truncheons, it's the rankest sort of hypocrisy—something they once abhorred but now have learned to value. Then again, the hippies and the yippies who gathered in Grant Park in Chicago never really had any intention of joining the proletariat. Born largely into the ranks of the middle and upper-middle classes, they dodged the draft in graduate school or flat-foot-four-F'd themselves out of danger. Hell, up until the draft lottery in 1969, if you were in college you were automatically deferred from military service; after that you only had to run the ganlet once and then, if your number didn't come, you were home free.

Those were the days of the eternal graduate student, stroking his beard and muttering to himself in a corner. We thought at the time he was squandering years of his life on some useless doctoral dissertation, which would equip him for a lifetime of teaching. What we didn't realize was he was just biding his time, like a parasite in a host, just waiting for the magic year of 1972 and George McGovern's "Come Home, America" presidential campaign to come bursting onto the national political scene. Bill and Hillary Clinton, we're looking at you.

Those of us in college during those years who were not leftists never had any illusions about who these people were. From the start, they were open in their contempt for the United States, for its history and traditions, even for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. When they said they believed in the first amendment, we knew they didn't mean it, that they were just using it as a shield until such time it could be discarded.

As for race, besides the war it was all they talked about, using race as a stick with which to beat the war. Noting that blacks didn't go to college in anywhere near the percentages of whites (and whites didn't much go to college in those days, either), they could loftily point out that the lads getting drafted were disproportionately black. Not that they were going to volunteer to help address the imbalance, mind you. But in any case, whites were the "freaks and monsters" of history and the world would be a better place without them. The point was to Resist, and Fight the Power:

Where did you think "wokeness" came from?

Now their pampered behinds are turning 70 and in some cases pushing 80, veterans all of the Long March through the Institutions, but their attitudes haven't changed one bit. As charter members of the largest generation in American history, they have long known they would inherit the earth, as if by divine right. And yet here, at the end, they're having to take guff from people who have no idea who Michel Foucault or Herbert Marcuse was.

And what guff! "My body, my choice." How dare they throw those words back into our faces? The most neurotic and hypochondriacal generation of all time is convinced that when they issue an "order" in the name of "public health" it is to be obeyed by lesser mortals. Why shouldn't "climate skeptics," the unvaccinated, and all the purveyors of " mis- dis- and mal-information (MDM)" be watched closely by the Man? Why, even the Department of Homeland Security, brought to you by the Bush Family of Connecticut and Texas, believes that independent thought and free speech, those hallmarks of the Sixties, now pose a danger to "our democracy"!

From the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (yes, there is such a thing):

Misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation make up what CISA defines as “information activities”. When this type of content is released by foreign actors, it can be referred to as foreign influence. Definitions for each are below.

  • Misinformation is false, but not created or shared with the intention of causing harm.
  • Disinformation is deliberately created to mislead, harm, or manipulate a person, social group, organization, or country.
  • Malinformation is based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.

Foreign and domestic threat actors use MDM campaigns to cause chaos, confusion, and division. These malign actors are seeking to interfere with and undermine our democratic institutions and national cohesiveness.

We used to call those things mistakes or differences of opinion. All of a sudden, they're hate crimes.

Back in the day, the comic strip Pogo, by Walt Kelly, was immensely popular. Perhaps its most famous moment came on April 22, 1970—the first Earth Day—when Kelly drew a poster depicting his title character, a possum, sadly contemplating a trash-strewn landscape and observing, "We have met the enemy and he is us." The Left loved that sentiment then, and they love it now. Except that the players have switched sides.

And this time, the whole world is watching them.

Lies, Damn Lies and Covid Statistics

Though I’ve blogged quite a lot on the pandemic, I want to make it clear, for the avoidance of doubt, that I am not and never have been an epidemiological whiz-kid. Oxford-educated Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London is mostly definitely of whiz-kid pedigree and, together with many of his peers, is particularly prone to hyperbole when it comes to predicting the outcome of pandemics. His inflated numbers even undermined Donald Trump’s instinctive common sense in the early days.

I don’t want to be too critical here. Epidemiologists relied upon by governments when infectious diseases spring up are on a hiding to nothing. There is no kudos to be found in underestimating. While you might be accused of alarmism for overestimating the virulence of a disease that’s so much better than being accused of reckless homicide on the other side.

So, there it is. It is probably wise to divide the dire predictions of epidemiologists by, say, ten at least, to get a handle on the real threat. But, big problem. Politicians too are on a hiding to nothing of the same character as are epidemiologists. Result, unity tickets in overestimating the threat.

Threat level: 50 feet!

Where then do we turn for realism, you might ask? Shucks, that’s where people like you and I come in. People who unfashionably, in these postmodern days, try to find the truth. Who are willing to give non-conformists like Professor Ehud Qimron of Tel Aviv University the time of day. Who don’t necessarily take official pronouncements as gospel. Who are willing to boldly go where no conformist medico has gone before. Sometimes searching for truth takes you on Captain-Kirk-like journeys into the unknown.

Exploring the unknown puts you at risk. In this case of being wrong. Well, I won’t actually be wrong because I’m sitting on the fence. I’m simply asking this question:

How many people with two, three or more serious comorbidities, who’ve closely encountered Covid in its various guises, have been saved by one or other of the vaccines? By saved I mean saved from being placed in intensive care, intubated or saved from dying. And if saved from dying, for how many months.

Dodgy data aside, we have a level of information on the number people who’ve suffered badly from Covid. We don’t know how many people with serious comorbidities, cross-matched with their vaccination status, have escaped relatively unscathed. We don’t know that telling information. We're not told.

To cut to the chase. Do the vaccines provide a protective effect for people with serious comorbidities; the only people at significant risk? This would not show up in big pharma’s clinical trials. Those with serious comorbidities would not be risked in any trial. Ergo, we have no information from the trials on the effectiveness of the vaccines for those whom they might help.

As healthy people are at no material risk from the virus, what the heck does it mean to assert that vaccines offer them protection? So far as I can tell, the only rationale for healthy people and, despicably and deplorably, healthy children being vaccinated, willingly and forcibly, is to boost the profits of big pharma and the lobbying dollars which flow to politicians and political parties.

Threat level: co-morbidities kill.

The CDC provide a long list of comorbidities which might make Covid more deadly. This includes kidney, liver and lung disease, dementia, diabetes, heart conditions, and obesity. I’m going to take a layman’s guess here. These comorbidities are likely to make matter worse whatever peripatetic infection comes along.

There is a strong correlation between falling very ill with Covid and age. However, most if not all of this correlation is likely spurious. I don’t doubt that the very old and frail will be susceptible to infections of most kinds. But the fact is that age and comorbidities are fellow travelers. Is it principally age that downs Covid patients or their comorbidities? This is an important question which I’ve not seen addressed, at least in the popular press. Unfortunately, most journalists no longer seem curious. They’ve largely become amanuenses taking dictation from official sources and rebadging it as factual news.

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky recently referred to a study of over a million people who were vaccinated between December 2020 and October 2021. She commented: “The overwhelming number of deaths, over 75 percent, occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities, so really these are people who were unwell to begin with.” Dr Walensky commented in the way that she did to let vaccinations off the hook. But hang on. Isn’t it people with comorbidities that the vaccines are meant to save? And where is the comparable study of deaths of unvaccinated people. Just maybe, we don’t know, more than 75 percent of them would have had at least four comorbidities.

Among those with serious comorbidities, I’d like to see an apples-to-apples comparison of intubation and death rates between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. I’m not convinced by the official spiel which is constantly rammed down our throats. Show the evidence?

Politicians and their public-health minders make a show of unvaccinated people dying. Only by dragging out the information do we find that they suffered from serious comorbidities. Particularly ghoulish delight is taken in announcing the death of a youngish person. Often only later is it discovered that the person concerned was also very sick to begin with.

These people can’t be trusted. They have an agenda. Florida governor Ron DeSantis referred to their disinformation as “noble lies” when explaining that he intended to tell the whole unadorned truth. He was too kind. Any pretence of nobility was lost with vaccine passports and masking and injecting children.

Back to my question. Without doubting immune responses from vaccines found in laboratories, what happens when the rubber hits the road? To wit, two neighbours, one vaccinated four or five months ago, one unvaccinated, are both equally overweight, have diabetes, high blood pressure and dicky tickers. Having caught Covid, both are prone on their respective couches under instructions from their doctors to call an ambulance upon the onset of breathing difficulties. How much better chance does the vaccinated person have of avoiding hospitalisation, intubation and/or death?

Please don’t say that a larger proportion of the unvaccinated have been hospitalised or have died. That says nothing. It’s quite possible that those at risk of dying because of underlying conditions disproportionately form the same cohort who are reluctant to be vaccinated precisely because they have underlying conditions. Lies, damn lies and Covid stats.

'Pandemic' Truths: Time for a New Narrative

The evidence is pouring in:

In an open letter published in Natural Selections, Wyoming paramedic Jordan Hayes compellingly argues that there should be, not only religious exemptions, but scientific exemptions to mandatory vaccination, for at least two obvious reasons: “The current crop of mRNA tech is designed for a version of the virus no longer in circulation,” and “The mRNA tech does not durably prevent transmission of even the version it was designed for.”

There's a difference, you know.

Statistics relating to “all cause mortality” make it clear that Covid mortality rates have been vastly exaggerated. The harm caused by the clumsy omnibus response to the pandemic far exceeds the suffering attributed to the virus. Delayed medical treatments and suspicious post-vaccine deaths are not calculated by the CDC and the FDA, which “determine on a case-by-case basis whether reported adverse events can be attributed to the vaccine” rather than dealing with large comparative figures and significant numbers of similar events—thus leaving a false impression of vaccine safety.

A Danish study shows that “the effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines against omicron is actually negative. The Pfizer vaccine makes recipients 76.5 percent more likely and the Moderna recipients 39.3 percent more likely to be infected than unvaccinated people.”

Pfizer’s 95 percent vaccine effectiveness claim is drastically wrong. According to Pfizer’s own numbers, the absolute risk reduction in the unvaccinated control group (0.88 percent)  compared to the test group (0.84 percent), is statistically insignificant, providing a net benefit of only 0.04 percent. But Pfizer gave the relative risk reduction number, that is, the difference between 0.88 percent and 0.84 percent, which is 95 percent. Moreover, the trial was “unblinded” after only two months rather than the stipulated three years, so that there was no longer a viable placebo group and thus no way to assess long term effectiveness and safety. Indeed, after six months, the inoculated group showed an increase in illness and mortality. 

As the CanadianCovidCare Alliance reports, “Pfizer's own 6 month report data on its COVID-19 inoculation shows greater illness and death in the inoculation arm than the placebo arm”—plus poor trial design, missing data, underpowered studies, passive surveillance and more. And it’s getting worse. Dr. Mark Trozzi exposes Pfizer’s “missing information,” grudgingly released by the FDA, which shows between 87.5 percent and 100 percent abortions and premature deaths of babies during preliminary trials involving injected pregnant women. 

She's got a point.

Pulmonary specialist Dr. Peter Kory reports that CV19 injections are “not safe, not effective” and are causing an escalating number of deaths.  Dr. Kory warns that “you are starting to see it in actuarial data with life insurance companies. The life insurance companies have been paying out claims like they never have before.” Actuarial tables don’t lie. Dr. Kory points out that government agencies are suffering from “regulatory capture” by Big Pharma “while disregarding cheaper, safer and more effective drugs.” The “war” on re-purposed drugs like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin is ongoing. It is revealing that the FDA initially insisted on waiting 55 years before releasing vaccine-related documents.

Lockdowns don’t work. An extensive meta-study performed by three acknowledged experts showed conclusively that “based on the stringency index studies, we find little to no evidence that mandated lockdowns in Europe and the United States had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality rates.” The same is true of SIPOs (Shelter-in-Place Orders) and NPIs (Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions). Writing in the Brownstone Institute, Joakim Book suns up: Lockdowns “are not worth the hassle, the pain, the societal upheaval, the misery and human suffering that accompanied them.” 

In an article for The Globe and Mail, Norman Doidge carefully dissects the destructive failings of the official and medical response to the pandemic. He is, admittedly, careful not to offend: Gates is “Mr. Gates”; the Pfizer 95 percent claim is taken at face value; the vaccines have “limits” rather than massive casualties; Israel’s third booster helped “beat back” the Delta wave when it did no such thing as cases continue to skyrocket.

Yes, but so what?

But he underscores the manifest fiasco and bankruptcy of the Covid industry in meticulous detail, for example: inexpensive and generic early treatments were not considered because they had no pharmaceutic sponsors; the original vaccine trials were woefully inadequate and unreliable in many different ways; breakthrough infections have proliferated among the vaccinated; “too many shots might cause immune system fatigue” and much more. He concludes that the Covid master narrative was irremediably flawed and its justification is now gone. Despite his diplomatic approach, the article provides a thorough dismantling of the Covid master narrative, and announces that a new, more nuanced narrative must replace it.

The new narrative, one imagines, would go something like this:

The new narrative, however, is far from generally accepted and will run into formidable opposition from the architects of the Great Reset, in particular chairman of the World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab and his army of wealthy and influential cohorts. 

Der Klaus, zu befehlen.

According to famed German economist Christian Woolf, the pandemic shutdown was part of a larger strategy whose purpose was to collapse the world economy and bring in a digital or programmable currency controlled by a central bank. “What we are witnessing now,” Woolf writes, “is an attempt to provoke the greatest social chaos by every conceivable means, to wait until the chaos has reached its maximum intensity, and then, with the help of a panacea called ‘universal basic income’, to move from a situation of maximum chaos to one of total control.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has arrived at the same conclusion. The official Covid response mechanism was pre-planned and deployed to further the aims of the Great Reset. When one recalls that many world leaders and influential individuals are graduates of Schwab’s Young Global Leaders school, including Angela Merkel, Jacinda Ardern, Tony Blair, Emmanuel Macron, Justin Trudeau, Boris Johnson, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and many more, global and procedural uniformity among 186 countries becomes understandable.

But all is not lost. Woolf believes that “the plans of the elite, and the vision of Klaus Schwab” can be defeated as the public gradually awaken to the destruction being planned for them.

The scaffolding of lies is crumbling before our eyes” and we are observing the gradual “disintegration of the [old] narrative.

By dint of a continuing and vigorous campaign mounted by scrupulous and erudite thinkers, brave internet souls and courageous medical specialists, and despite the black cumulus of censorship and deceit, information is coming out. People who have endured privation under the Covid autocrats or lost everything to government mandates and a dogmatic class of health officers will be part of the resistance vanguard, like the Trucker Freedom Convoy in Canada and elsewhere, or the citizens of New Orleans who are presently suing their mayor.

The vector of resentment against arbitrary authority is spiking. With effort and determination, the new narrative of reason and integrity may come to supplant the old narrative of disaster and control.