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.

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.

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.

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.

Gone, Baby, Gone?

Can it be true? Is it possible? If so, it is too delicious. Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau has tested positive for the dreaded Covid-19, the head cold and sniffle over which he's turned Canada into a virtual police state the past two years:

Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has tested positive for Covid-19, he announced Monday, as his nation continues to face a surge in cases due to the Omicron variant, as well as rowdy protests in the capital over pandemic health restrictions. Trudeau warned Canadians this month to "hunker down" for winter.

That's not all. Rumors -- eventually confirmed -- swirled over the weekend that, as the massive Freedom Convoy of truckers from all over Canada converged on the nation's capital to protest vaccine mandates and other instances of Covid heavy-handedness, Justin Trudeau had broken his then-prophylactic Covid quarantine over the unlikely event that the protest could turn violent. Not yet confirmed is where he's actually fled. The official statement says an "undisclosed location." The delicious rumor holds that he's fled the country!

Hysterical, if true. And doubly so because, even as the bought-and-paid-for Canadian media warned, in shrill and hysterical tones, that this was the second coming of Oswald Mosley's Blackshirts;  the CTV article "Experts say online conversation around trucker convoy veering into dangerous territory” might have the most Canadian headline I've ever read. The Ontario Provincial Police made no arrests and reported “no incidents of violence or injuries."

The phrase "mostly peaceful protest" became a dark euphemism in the summer of 2020, but this was apparently an entirely peaceful protest. The worst charge the press could hit participants with was a few incidents of people "parking on the grounds of the National War Memorial before police asked them to move."

Canadians like to tease Americans about the outcome of the War of 1812. This is a matter of some dispute, since U.S. textbooks have tended to say that the war's outcome was inconclusive, whereas Canadians' say that they that Canadian soldiers under British leadership beat the tar out of the Americans. "Remember when we burned your White House!" is a phrase this author has heard more than once.

Well, fair play to them. In 1814 they did burn the Presidential Mansion, as it was then called, along with much of the rest of the city in retaliation for the burning of Toronto. Still, that attack on Washington was the occasion of a moment of rare presidential heroism, when James Madison actually took command of troops during the Battle of Bladensburg in the hopes of defending the city, the only time a sitting American President has done so.

Meanwhile, Justin Trudeau, camp counselor, high school drama teacher, and now, amazingly, prime minister, fled (possibly even the country) when confronted by his own citizens pissed off about his policies. What an embarrassment.

Luckily his act seems to be wearing thin with the Canadian public, and the truckers seem to be winning them over:

Who's the "fringe minority" now?

Mad as Hell, Not Gonna Take It Anymore

For the past decade or so, populism has been the key to understanding many of the big happenings in world politics. Since the disastrously managed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the 2008 financial crisis provoked the ur-populist movement, the Tea Party, anti-elitist politics has made waves around the world from Brexit and the election of Donald Trump in the Anglophere, to the Gilets Jaunes and Manif pour tous movements in France, and the rise of populist nationalist parties and governments in former Eastern bloc nations like Poland and Hungary.

One country which has seemed to have no significant dalliance with this phenomenon, however, has been Canada. It has become almost a truism in the world of political commentary that the Great White North is immune to populism. Why might this be? The generally accepted explanation was given voice by Justin Trudeau back in 2015 -- Canada, he said, is the world’s first “post-national state,” a nation with “no core identity." It is, in his estimation, essentially an administrative unit rather than a conglomeration of people with a history and a common self-understanding, and consequently populism has no way to get a toe-hold there. You can't have populism without a people!

This outlook has informed Trudeau's seven years in power. He has worked hard at portraying a prime minister on T.V. rather than serve as one in reality. He has outdone the leaders of every other nation in his embrace of what Irish political commentator Conor Fitzgerald (discussing his own countrymen) has referred to as "goodboyism," the desperate desire to be patted on the head by the international political community. Do whatever you can, say whatever you need to, to get a nice write-up in the New York Times or get someone to notice you at the United Nations. That's what it means to be the prime minister of a post-national state.

Not a real prime minister, either.

To that end, Trudeau has worked overtime -- at the expense of Canadians and Canadian businesses -- to become a darling of the international environmentalist movement. More recently he has gone all in on Covid-19 restrictions and vaccine mandates, referring to vaccine hesitant Canadians as “extremists," "misogynists," and "racists,” adding "Do we tolerate these people?” This is a common trope with him, by the way -- everyone who disagrees with his policies must be "othered," to use language the Left tends to love in other contexts. They are always “extremists," "misogynists," and "racists."

Meanwhile, Canadians have grown increasingly restive. Polling indicates widespread support for strict Covid measures, but when you talk to actual Canadians -- not activists, but regular people, they're fed-up. Their cost of living has gone up -- something Canadians tend to be keenly aware of. Some of them have seen their businesses shut down or were laid off in 2020 and haven't been able to find work since. Their kids have been wearing masks to school for almost two years now, with no end in sight. School boards periodically decide to shut down for a few weeks at a time with little-to-no warning.

And Canada's governing and media classes -- Right as well as Left -- smugly respond to this discontent by pointing to abstract economic indicators suggesting that the country is doing fine, and tossing in for good measure "at least our case numbers are lower than America's!" Meanwhile even U.S. states with strict Covid regulations are generally looser than provinces like Ontario and Quebec, and Canadians who have been able to resume their annual trips to Florida this winter say it feels so normal they can't believe it, that it's like something out of a dream.

No wonder Canadians are heading to the free state of Florida.

Well the breaking point, at least for a lot of Canadians, seems to have arrived. The occasion is a new mandate for cross-border truck drivers that went into effect on the 15th of January and which requires unvaccinated truckers to quarantine for 14 days whenever they cross the border, effectively making it impossible for them to operate. The number of truckers affected is comparatively small -- estimates are between 10 and 15 percent of drivers. But with supply chains already under stress from Covid lockdowns and other related economic factors, 10 percent of truck drivers out of commission has the potential to be disastrous for Canada, not to mention for the individual truckers who are unable to work.

Moreover, the mandates are entirely punitive -- no one is even arguing that truckers pose a significant risk for spreading Covid and quarantining them won't slow the spread appreciably. Finally, even if it does "slow the spread" of a virus that's been circling Planet Earth for the past two years and more... so what?

To broadcast their annoyance a group of truckers have organized a cross-country convoy, from Vancouver to Ottawa, the nation's capital. Along the way thousands of truckers, and other frustrated Canadians, have joined them, more than they could have imagined -- current estimates suggest that the convoy is 70 kilometers long and includes something like 50,000 trucks. Thousands more have taken to waving flags and holding up signs on overpasses saying "Thank You, Truckers!," "God Keep Our Land Glorious and Free," and other patriotic slogans you wouldn't expect in a post-national nation.

Justin Trudeau was asked about the convoy this week and he responded predictably: "The small fringe minority of people who are on their way to Ottawa, who are holding unacceptable views that they are expressing, do not represent the views of Canadians." I'm surprised he refrained from calling them racist misogynists. Of course, as the number of participants swelled, Trudeau apparently became concerned that he might be forced to address their concerns when they finally make it to Ottawa, so he announced that he had been exposed to -- not even tested positive for! -- Covid-19, and so he will be isolating for the sake of, well, his political career.

But still the convoy rolls on. Will it effect any significant change, or will it fizzle out? That's impossible to say at the moment. But it feels like a significant moment for Canada, when regular people who have long been ill-served by their political leaders (of all parties it should be noted -- Erin O'Toole, Jason Kenney, and Doug Ford have been just as terrible on Covid as Justin Trudeau) dug in their heels and announced that they're not gonna take it anymore.

Maybe enough people show up to show the Prime Minister what a small "fringe minority" with “no core identity" actually looks like. But don't take it from me, take it from Howard Beale:

Here's hoping.

Canadian 'Unacceptables' Converging on Ottawa

A 70-kilometer-long "Freedom Convoy" of angry Canadian truckers -- maybe as many as 50,000 of them -- is driving across Canada. Dubbed by Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau as "a small fringe" holding "unacceptable views," they're protesting the country's onerous Covid vaccine mandates, which require all cross-border truckers -- which is a lot of them, since the U.S. and Canada do hundreds of billions worth of trade every year -- to be fully vaccinated or else to quarantine for 14 days, an impossible requirement if they're going to be at all economically competitive.

 

Some 75 percent the goods traded over the border is hauled by Canadian truckers, so even with the comparatively small number of unvaccinated truckers, this mandate has the potential to be extremely disruptive to the industry. Moreover, the number of participants in the convoy suggests that it isn't only the unvaccinated who are protesting -- even vaccinated truckers are upset about the policy, and about general Covid fecklessness from the Trudeau government.

But even the jaw-dropping number of trucks in the convoy doesn't capture the magnitude of what is going on here. Many thousands more regular Canadians have taken the time to show their support, holding up signs, waiving flags, and on and on, at every major overpass between Vancouver and Ottawa. As conservative commentator Rex Murphy put it:

Canadians are unsettled and have been for every day of the confused back-and-forth imperatives coming out of Ottawa and the provincial capitals during the two and more years of C0vid. Furthermore, with the virtual amputation of our Parliament as the venue for voicing and hearing the sentiments of the Canadian people, together with the impotence of the official opposition, and the slack coverage of the press... these factors have meant the slow rise of mistrust, and in many cases an anger that has not been noted or reported.

Canadian discontent over Covid is finally boiling over over. With a limp parliament, a foppish prime minister, and supine Conservative politicians, a lot of Canadians have found in this Freedom Convoy the first glimmer of hope, of someone giving voice to their frustrations in a good long time.

What happens when they arrive in the Canadian capital is anybody's guess. Your move, Justin.

Something Wicked Really Does This Way Come

After almost two years of intensively studying the chemistry of viruses, the nature of the Covid pandemic and the policies adopted to combat it, I’ve concluded, as have many others, that a massive fraud has been visited upon a fearful and credulous public. And after examining innumerable podcasts and blockbuster video interviews conducted with highly credentialed virologists and public health experts, most recently with Professor of Medicine at Stanford University Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, leading cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, the inventor of core mRNA technology Dr. Robert Malone, and Michael Yeadon, a former VP at Pfizer, what I once thought sounded like a conspiracy theory may well be a conspiracy fact.

As to be expected, these specialists have been called “fringe researchers” by dubious government functionaries like Anthony Fauci, director of the NIAID, and Francis Collins, director of the NIH. The truth is that these “fringe researchers” are veteran masters in the general field of immunology. And their testimony is damning.

We learn that hospitals have been financially incentivized to report and inflate the numbers of doubtful cases and mortalities, and that deaths “with Covid” were routinely conflated with “from Covid.” Injuries and deaths due to the vaccines have been largely downplayed and hidden; voluntary reporting sites such as VAERS in the U.S. and Yellow Card in the U.K. are grossly unreliable. We learn that the vaccinated are susceptible to infection and shedding at rates equal to or higher than the unvaccinated. Emergency-use legislation shields Big Pharma from legal proceedings initiated by those who have suffered from the vaccines. Meanwhile, as former New York Times investigative reporter Alex Berenson reports, quoting the U.K. Office for National Statistics, the vaccinated are dying at twice the proportional rate of the unvaccinated.

Pay me now or pay me later.

Furthermore, economies have been wrecked, countries are drowning in debt, and the monetary supply is awash in QE printed money, threatening global fiscal collapse. Societies have been divided into warring factions, and necessary discourse has been polarized. The definition of “vaccination” has been conveniently altered, swapping in the weasel-word “protection” for the gold-standard of “immunity” to support the rollout of leaky and nondurable injected substances.

Lots or batches of Pfizer vaccines with inconsistent contents, as Michael Yeadon points out, have been erratically distributed, accounting for “extreme variation in the toxicity profile”; that is, some recipients show relatively less or no immediate adverse effects while others succumb to a vast spectrum of critical diseases. As Yeadon’s charts vividly demonstrate, the clumping factor among the dead and adversely affected is unmistakable. It is as if a clandestine experiment were being engineered, comparing the effect of differently formulated counteractants on different populations.

In the words of Robert Malone and Peter Navarro, the vaccines “can trigger serious cardiac and thrombotic conditions, menstrual cycle disruptions, Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barre syndrome and anaphylaxis. Male children appear particularly prone to myocarditis while, post-vaccination, individuals may have suppressed immunities that make them vulnerable to other diseases.” Young children of all ages, who have no need for protection against Covid, are at considerable risk from the inoculations, and pregnant women are prone to miscarriages and stillbirths. These Pharma products have been rushed to market and have not undergone the standard 5-12 years of testing. No one knows what the future portends for those who have received the jab.

In an article for GreenMedInfo, Stephanie Seneff, a Senior Research Scientist at MIT, confirms that “these vaccines, both the mRNA vaccines and the DNA vector vaccines, may be a pathway to crippling disease sometime in the future… we will likely see an alarming increase in several major neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson’s disease, CKD, ALS and Alzheimer’s, and these diseases will show up with increasing prevalence among younger and younger populations, in years to come.”

We're all in this together, right?

Similarly, as much-maligned and predictably deplatformed Belgian virologist Geert Vanden Bossche warns, thanks to mass vaccination, “countries… have prepared their populations to serve as an excellent breeding ground for more infectious variants.” Citing E.U. regulators, Bloomberg acknowledges that frequent boosters could weaken the immune response “and may not be feasible.” It appears that vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome is becoming a problem. Obviously, the variants will keep on coming as the virus finds ways to mutate around the vaccine wall, like the German army circumventing the Maginot Line as they overran France.

The alarming practice of print media and digital censorship burying countervailing views and squelching open debate shows that only the official narrative will be tolerated. The revelation that most so-called progressive “fact checkers” on left-wing sites and news agencies are subordinate hires gives the game away. As Malone reveals, the CEO of Thomson-Reuters sits on the board of Pfizer. And when it comes to government policy—masks, lockdowns, vaxxports, fines and detention—coercion may not even be necessary. Deploying a clever and unscrupulous strategy, our overlords first batter a biddable population into a condition of abject terror, then poll it for majority approval. Once people are in the grip of mass formation psychosis, government can do as it will. The public will be grateful and give the political class that has prepped and tenderized it for collective consent a loud vote of confidence. The result is preordained. Meanwhile, the hesitant and the skeptical are scapegoated and “otherized.”

Something deeply troubling is happening here. In a discussion with osteopathic physician Joseph Mercola, now the medical industry’s bête noir, psychiatrist Mark McDonald, author of United States of Fear, explained he first presumed that human frailty, error and greed could account for the disastrous policies unleashed by Big Pharma, the state-media, the Burgravial elite, and by repressive political measures imposed upon the public. Going against his own secular and rational grain, he has since come to believe that a force of objective evil is now in play. There is something so precise and well-orchestrated “about how all these actions have come together…that it leads me to think that there must be some sort of force or power at play.” We no longer have the inherent capacity, he worries, “to resist true evil.”

Everything seemingly is spinning out of control.

In his compelling interview with Joe Rogan, Robert Malone would not definitively say whether the destructive Covid drama enacted by the authorities, political and medical, is the result of incompetence or malevolence, or perhaps both, but the implication clearly favors the latter. He goes further, echoing Vanden Bossche. Writing in a Washington Times op-ed, Malone observes that “The more you vaccinate, the more likely you will spawn vaccine-resistant mutations; and the more likely those vaccinated will fall prey to the mutations. A particularly lethal vaccine-resistant mutation in a universally vaccinated world may well wipe out the human race”—or at any rate, a significant portion of it. This is not a fanciful hypothesis.

McDonald and Malone are serious men and fully knowledgeable in their disciplines; they would not traffic in doomsday histrionics unless there were potential warrant. The scenario seems distinctly melodramatic, yet the schematism makes sense, and ridicule will not do as these experts are among the best we have. They should be heeded.

As noted, Michael Yeadon, who spent over thirty years at Pfizer and rose to a top-ranking position, is as close to an oracle as we can get. His deposition is well-founded. Yeadon is convinced the Pfizer juggled the books and is guilty of defective quality control and poor auditing protocols. Regulators are funded by the drug companies. Additionally, he has no doubt that vaxxports are a “diabolical scheme” to enforce compliance with government dictates. He fears that something pre-meditated is in play. The circumstantial evidence for nefarious intentions among government leaders and bureaucrats, Big Pharma, media, left-wing plutocrats, academia, the World Economic Forum, and the medical establishment is impossible to ignore. The extent of the alleged collusion is mind-boggling, and yet it seems entirely plausible given the astronomical sums and consolidated power involved. As openDemocracy asserts, “something fishy really is going on in the realm of global governance.”

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Davos to be born?

The recent news from Israel—commonly regarded as the sauceboat of Covid policy and which has come to be known as "Pfisrael" owing to an arrangement with Pfizer—is long overdue. A prestigious team of medical researchers from the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Tel Aviv University has written an open letter sharply criticizing the Israeli—and indeed globalmanagement of the coronavirus pandemic.Addressing the Ministry of Health, they write: “The economy you ruined, the unemployed you caused, and the children whose education you destroyed—they are the surplus victims as a result of your own actions only. There is currently no medical emergency, but you have been cultivating such a condition for two years now because of lust for power, budgets and control.”

Richard Fernandez believes that the “empires of fear” the “bureaucrats [have spent] the last three years building” will come to an end in a post-pandemic world, and that “a widespread political backlash” against the over-reaching authorities may be unleashed. I’m not so sure. True, the emergence of the Omicron variant is thought by many researchers to signal the end of the pandemic as it produces cross-reactive T-cell immunity. The spike protein does not induce effective, long-lasting T-cell response. The Omicron variant, however, induces a wider range of cross-reactive T-cells and can be viewed, as The Epoch Times reports, as a live attenuated vaccine like those used to fight measles, mumps, chickenpox and polio. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla predicts a return to normal life by spring of this year. Nevertheless, whether or not the pandemic bites the dust remains to be seen, for the proponents of the New World Order or global surveillance state, aka the Great Reset, are unlikely to relent in their quest to create their corrupt and repressive version of the New Jerusalem.

Whatever the reason for the policy cataclysm that has blighted our lives—frailty, error, avarice, ignorance, stupidity, malevolence, or mere evil—it should be clear that an unholy alliance is still at work and that we remain at risk, though not from long-term Covid, which can be treated with cheap and effective therapeutics and which will, like all viruses, eventually burn itself out, remaining with us endemically as does the flu or the common cold. We are, rather, at the mercy of a coven of political, financial and medical authorities who stand to benefit from our ongoing trauma, who may have ulterior motives and no intention of abandoning their agenda. We must be prepared. One recalls Ray Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes. Indeed, I suspect it does.

Suffer the Little Children

Headlined in an article published in Nature on July 20, 2021: “Deaths from Covid ‘incredibly rare’ among children.” The figures tend to be murky. Deliberately so, I’m inclined to believe. Nevertheless, it seems clear enough that almost all, perhaps all, of the relatively tiny number of children aged 5- to 11-years-of-age who have died from Covid have, in fact, died with Covid; having had serious underlying illnesses or disabilities of one kind or another, including untoward obesity.

Choose your virologist, immunologist or epidemiologist if you want a view that suits your own. They can be found. One of my choices is Yale epidemiology professor Dr. Harvey Risch. He’s often on Fox News. I prefer his cautionary approach when it comes to children. Keep them home-schooled rather than compulsorily vaxxed in school, he argues. Do no harm, rings a bell with me. This, from Dr. Eric Rubin, doesn’t. He’s professor of immunology at Harvard, and a member of the FDA advisory committee. When asked, prior to FDA approval, about the safety of the Pfizer vaccine for children, he reportedly replied:

We’re never going to learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes.

Why are children akin to lab rats among those on the left? Rubin will be of the left; no doubt about that. You will know them by their utterances. I struggle, but think it is to do with the greater good, as they see it, trumping individual rights. If a child must die to save ten old people; well, do the sums.

Do it for the children.

Used to take coffee each week with a couple of blokes who lived in the same apartment building. Unsurprisingly, both were somewhat to the left of me but the conversation was convivial. Progressively, pun intended, the group grew by another four, including one dreadful feminist harpy. As the group grew, so did its centre of gravity move radically leftwards. I divorced the group to remain sane. I doubt they missed me, being unchallenged henceforth when swapping agenda-driven distortions and lies.

There was a gay marriage postal plebiscite in Australia in November 2017. As you might imagine I was the only one of seven who voted no, but that’s by the way. One bloke, a member of Australian Skeptics (skeptical of everything except for global warming) and vice president of a humanist fringe group, the Secular Party of Australia, was particularly far gone. He provided us all with a draft of a submission his party intended to make to government; arguing, in part, that the needs of gay ‘married’ couples needed to be weighed in deciding whether they could adopt babies and young children. I annotated his draft, before returning it, with NO, NO, NO! It didn’t influence his final submission.

But you see, being far gone leftwards, he took very little account of the rights of babies and infants who can’t speak for themselves. He seemed not to comprehend that their welfare in the matter of adoption is not only paramount but all that counts, whoever is adopting them. It isn’t something that can be put in the context of the greater good. But he was prepared to stack the interests of gay couples against the interests of babies and infants; presumably, to serve, in his warped mind, the greater good. And by this route, I come back to my point.

Governments and medical authorities seem prepared to stack the interests of aging adults against the interests of children. This thinking is so estranged from the thinking of yesteryear that we, those of us who’ve retained moral standards of the quite recent past, are thrown off balance. Effectively, we are at sea. Answer: set the compass due north and steer towards truth, justice and the American way, so to speak. No compromise. Put false trails into stark relief.

There is no medical justification for vaccinating young children against Covid.  Older children too for that matter. To all intents and purposes, they face no risk from the virus. How much risk they face from the vaccine, whichever one, is unknown with any certainty. In normal course, the vaccines would not be given to children. If the principal rationale is to inhibit the spread of the virus among adults; it’s unconscionable. Close enough to evil to scare me. Yet it’s happening.

What am I, a lab rat?

Countries are already doing it. Israel started in late November, as did Canada and the United States. Reports out of the U.K. suggest it may start there in the spring.  When the FDA gave its tick of approval for vaccinating twenty-eight million 5- to 11-year-olds in the U.S., Emma McBryde, an infectious-diseases modeller at the Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine in Townsville said, “it will save lives.” She went on:

But it could also have a broader impact, given that many US children aged 5 to 11 have returned to school unvaccinated in the past few months, and the group now accounts for a significant portion of new Covid-19 cases, capable of transmitting the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 to others… For every child’s life you save, you may well save many, many more adult lives.

Catch the pointed end bit. Exactly how many children are worth putting at unwarranted risk from vaccines to save adult lives; and mostly aged adult lives? Median age of death from Covid in Australia in 2020 equals 87 years (82 years for deaths from all causes). No child has died.

But, amid the ridiculously hyped-up Omicron kerfuffle, Professor Paul Kelly, Australia’s chief medical officer, said that he was awaiting advice from the TGA (Australia's equivalent to the FDA) on offering vaccines to 5- to 11-year-olds. For what possible legitimate purpose?  And notice the word offering, implying a free choice. Really, exactly how long would it be before little Jill and Johnny were singled out as unvaxxed pariahs?

Finally, I have begun to realise that my erstwhile coffee companion is, in fact, no further gone leftwards than is the whole apparatus of governments throughout most of the world; and throw in most of the media; and, regrettably, most of the medical establishment. There is little remaining to know about the malign influence of the left. Yet, its influence has been even more pernicious than might have been thought possible. Locking children out of school is bad enough. Societies which are prepared to play fast and loose with children’s very lives have surely lost all moral compass.