In Canada it’s trucks versus tweets and the trucks are winning

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has called the truckers out for antisemitism, Islamophobia, anti-Black racism, homophobia, and transphobia. Huh?


Freedom Convoy protesters open up about standing for their beliefs

Two weeks ago, the “Freedom Convoy” began in earnest, with thousands of truckers from every province crossing Canada’s icy highways to take their grievances over vaccine mandates to the nation’s capital.

After many dramatic twists and turns, hundreds of trucks and thousands of protesters still clog up Ottawa’s streets. Two of North America’s most important border crossings also remain blockaded.

Perhaps most surprising of all, the demonstration seems to be working. As of yesterday, four provincial Premiers announced plans to either eliminate or roll back key Covid measures — in Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Prince Edward Island.

While decision-makers are eager to distance their decision-making from the protests, there is no doubt that the mood is melting in Canada. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has endured days of heckling in parliament —from both the right and the left — over his handling of the protests, with increased calls for him to reopen the country or at least listen to the truckers.

Trudeau has spent much of the last fortnight out of the public gaze. But he has been at the forefront of the Twitter war. In one tweet he characterised protesters as antisemites, Islamophobes, anti-Black racists, homophobes, and transphobes (an impressive list!). In another, he framed them as vandals, thieves and wavers of racist flags. Predictably, his words got the Twitter mobs baying.

Evidence for some of these claims is there, but scant. Footage has circulated of two lone actors, one waving a Confederate flag and one waving a Nazi flag. The former was heckled by crowds until he left the protest. He kept his identity tightly concealed, making it likely he was there to quite literally wave a false flag. The latter is still unidentified, even after a $6,500 reward was offered for leads on his identity.

Ottawa’s police chief and mayor have happily taken part in the war of words, which has helped keep things spicy on social media. Police Chief Peter Sloly warned of a “volatile” and “increasingly dangerous” situation and made repeated forecasts of impending violence that have failed to materialise. Mayor Jim Watson called a state of emergency, warning that the downtown occupiers posed a “serious danger and threat to the safety and security of residents”.

Following an injunction, honking has been banned for ten days in Ottawa, and over a thousand tickets have been given out for excessive noise and parking infractions. The city has also seen some 23 arrests over the two-week period, all in relation to “mischief”, resisting arrest, and similar misdemeanours.

The news media has likewise done its best to demonise the protest. An impressive video still circulates on Twitter — a compilation of media reports describing the demonstration as “sedition”, an “insurrection”, “a threat to democracy”, and worse. Nevertheless, even if residents and city officials are at their wits’ end, the drama in Ottawa remains leagues behind the melodrama.

Indeed, a Daily Mail journalist recently published a report after spending a full week on Ottawa’s streets trying to get a read on the situation:

“Since DailyMail.com arrived in Ottawa last week we have seen no indication of violence or vandalism or any extremist political agenda. In fact, the demonstrations have shown the opposite. Supplies brought in for the protesters also include bouncy castles for children as protests continue into the second week…

“Every trucker DailyMail.com spoke with said they came to protest non-violently and their only reason being there was to free Canada of its covid mandates. Truckers were conscientious of the public streets and kept them free of litter. They also shovelled snow and threw down de-icer making the streets and sidewalks easier to walk on.”

The report’s headline aptly summarises the disconnect between the online and real worlds: “Freedom Convoy truckers say Trudeau and North America’s liberal media are falsely demonising them as ultra-right-wing crazies. And after spending a week in their midst, the Mail’s reporter can only conclude these peaceful, good-natured protestors are 100% correct about that – if nothing else.”

On the pretext that the demonstration had become violent and unlawful, GoFundMe shut down a US$10 million fundraiser and refunded donors. Not to be deterred, organisers set up a new campaign via GiveSendGo that quickly raised US$8 million — but just today, the Ontario government was successful in convincing a court to freeze access to those funds, too.

If the last fortnight is anything to go on, this will only harden the demonstrators’ resolve. When police began seizing fuel from truckers, protesters saw the humorous side. They were soon seen carrying jerry cans en masse through the city — whether full or empty — to confound law enforcement officials, thereby turning the humble jerry into a symbol of Canadian dissent.

The propaganda war on Twitter will no doubt continue, but nothing beats the real world. And in the real world, the truckers are winning.

COLUMN BY

Kurt Mahlburg

Kurt Mahlburg is a writer and author, and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He has a passion for both the philosophical and the personal, drawing on his background as a graduate… More by Kurt Mahlburg

RELATED VIDEO: Tucker: Justin Trudeau is attacking human rights.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The COVID Quacks Were Wrong About Everything

The COVID quacks were wrong about everything.  Let’s take a quick trip through their latest blunders, shall we?

They were wrong about masks.  They finally admitted the cloth masks they’d been telling everybody to wear for two years are worthless and everybody should wear N95 masks.  They’re wrong about that, too.  N95 masks cause higher carbon dioxide levels, cognitive impairment, headaches, cardio-pulmonary stress, and even fatal heart attacks.

They were wrong about the definition of COVID deaths.  Public health authorities have routinely inflated the numbers by including people who die from other causes but happen to test positive for COVID.  The CDC finally admitted maybe that wasn’t a good idea and they really should separate out the number who are hospitalized for other reasons and test positive after being admitted for something else.  We’ve been jumping up and down about this for two years and we were right.

They were wrong about lockdowns. Twenty-four studies now show lockdowns “have had little to no public health effects, [but] have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted.”

They were wrong about mandates and are now back-pedaling in Illinois, New York, three Canadian provinces, and Sweden.  Just the News  NBC-5 Chicago  Reuters  AP  The Democrats in control of Virginia’s state senate just voted to make masks optional in school.   Why is this happening now?  As Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis put it, the medical science didn’t change, but the political science has.  Government officials now realize they’ve taken this COVID mandate thing just about as far as it will go.  People aren’t putting up with mandates anymore.  The mandates are becoming more unpopular by the day and the Democrats in control of places like Illinois and New York can see the November elections barreling down the tracks at them like a freight train.

The quacks were wrong about natural immunity.  They tried to argue people who caught COVID did not develop natural immunity to the disease.  The CDC now admits there is natural immunity and it actually works better than the vaccines.

They were wrong about COVID vaccines stopping transmission of disease. The director of the CDC later admitted the vaccines do not prevent transmission. You can be vaccinated and still pass the virus to other people.

They were wrong about how susceptible kids are to the disease.  Zeke Emanuel claimed unvaccinated kids are in danger of contracting the virus and getting a “serious condition of Omicron.”  When his argument was demolished, he claimed he “misspoke”.  Sure.

They were wrong to ignore vitamin D.  The information has been out there for a long time, but public health authorities ignored it.  Now, a study validates vitamin D deficiency makes people 14 times more susceptible to serious COVID and to die from the disease.

Fauci was wrong and flip-flopped on masks, on whether the vaccinated should wear masks, on whether kids should be in school, and on how much people should interact with each other during the pandemic.  Ron DeSantis put the flip-flops in a campaign ad and Fauci comes off looking like an idiot, because he is.

So, they were wrong about masks, COVID deaths, lockdowns, mandates, natural immunity and lots of other things.  What else are they wrong about, hmm?  Vaccine safety, maybe?  They keep saying the COVID vaccines are safe, but over 23,000 Americans have died within 14 days of being vaccinated, so far.  Where are the government safety studies that are supposed to be done when a vaccine disaster strikes?  What has the government decided about doing such studies? I’m trying to find out. I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the CDC for this information. First, they delayed, saying my request was ‘complex’, but now they’ve put it in the ordinary queue.  What does that really mean?  Does it mean they’ll take 75 years to answer like the FDA tried to do in another COVID vaccine FOIA case recently?  I’m not willing to wait 75 years. I will soon take steps to speed things up and put my request under court supervision.  Stay tuned.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: DHS Says COVID Misinformation Is Inspiring Terrorism, But It Won’t Provide Any Evidence

Biden’s Mask Mandate War on We The People

“For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.” – H. L. Mencken, American journalist, essayist, satirist, cultural critic.


Government mandates on getting vaxxed and wearing masks has been a contentious issue from the start. It is now coming to a head in Canada with the truckers Freedom Convoy and across America as well.

The Daily Mail’s Ronny Reyes, in anBlue surgical face masks are only 10% effective in preventing COVID infection, new study finds”  wrote:

  • University of Waterloo researchers find most cloth masks are only 10% effective
  • Researchers warn most cloth masks do not cover the face properly  
  • N95 or KN95 masks were found to be the most effective at filtering aerosols
  • Study also found that even ‘moderate ventilation’ matches the best of masks in terms of protection against COVID-19
  • Mask debate remains contentious in the country as delta variant spreads 

Masks and mask mandates

Masks have now become a big issue and Biden administration/CDC guidelines on wearing masks are coming into question.

It seem that governors of blue states are now gradually unmasking their people. It appears that their people have had enough and with the midterm elections on the horizon that Biden, CDC and the Democrats masking of America has fallen out of favor. Why, because it is impacting the economy, culture and health of Americans.

But Biden isn’t backing down, he’s doubling down on mask mandates.

During the February 9th, 2022 White House press conference Jen Psaki was asked about the White House’s COVID-19 policies. Watch the entire February 9th press conference:

Psaki was questioned about the economy, Covid restrictions and about blue states, like New York, lifting their mask mandates and a return to normalcy. The first question ask:

And if I could ask a question about — New York, today, was the latest to work on their mask mandates.  Several states are now, it seems, well ahead of the federal government in explaining the path out of the pandemic.  Is the President now falling behind states in explaining to Americans how are — we all can, sort of, resume our normal lives and get back to normalcy?

When asked if citizens should follow the CDC mask guidelines Psaki said,

“Yes. This is where we would advise any American to follow the CDC guidelines … no parent who wants to send their kid with a mask should be penalized. No teacher who wants to wear a mask should be penalized, or school district who makes that choice should be penalized.”

Question:

Jen, quick follow-up on that.  Does the administration risk looking out of touch with where the country is heading, in terms of lifting these mask mandates, if the CDC doesn’t revise its guidelines?

Answer:

Well, again, we understand where the emotions of the country are, right?  People are tired of masks.  I would say not even — if you look at the polling though, there’s also a huge chunk of people who still want masks.  Right?  So, it’s not even that specific.  It’s just that, as you noted, there are some states that are moving towards rolling back or giving more choice to local communities about how they will implement these requirements.

But, again, from the federal government, what our responsibility to do is to abide by what the President committed to on the campaign, which is to listen to scientists, listen to data.  That doesn’t move at the speed of politics; it moves at the speed of data.  And they — Dr. Walensky committed to — conveyed — or, I should say, confirmed that they were evaluating this at the CDC.

Following the data, not the politics

Psaki’s February 9th, 2022 statement is at best a lie and at worse a myth. To repeat Psaki said, “But, again, from the federal government, what our responsibility to do is to abide by what the President committed to on the campaign, which is to listen to scientists, listen to data.  That doesn’t move at the speed of politics; it moves at the speed of data.”

But the data is already in on the usefulness of masks.

Dr. Nancy Messonnier, Director of the Center for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases said on January 31st, 2020,

We don’t routinely recommend the use of face masks by the public to prevent respiratory illness. And we certainly are not recommending that at this time for this new [Covid] virus.”

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said,

[T]he average American does not need a N95 mask. These are really more for health care providers. He was echoed by Robert Redfield, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that there ‘is no role for these masks in the community’.

A 2011 randomized clinical trial found that medical masks offered no protection at all.

A 2015 study concluded rates of infection were especially high in cloth masks, finding particle penetration in nearly 97 percent of them.

A 2016 paper that analyzed six clinical studies found that N95 respirator masks fared no better than medical masks in preventing respiratory infection.

As recently as April 7, a paper analyzing data from 15 randomized trials concluded that,

“[C]ompared to no masks there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases for influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”

Perhaps similar reasoning guided the CDC’s about-face in April when it issued guidance recommending the use of cloth face coverings for healthy individuals (though the World Health Organization still advises against them).

The Bottom Line

Masking America isn’t about science or data. Masking Americans is purely politics and all about control. How do we know? Because 221 House Democrats voted to block the  “Unmask Our Kids Act.”

The Daily Callers’ Nicole Silverio in an article titled, “White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Wednesday there is a “distinct difference” between Democratic governors scrapping mask mandates and Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ handling of COVID-19” reported:

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Wednesday there is a “distinct difference” between Democratic governors scrapping mask mandates and Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ handling of COVID-19.

“We had another state today drop the indoor mask mandate as the CDC is confirming that their guidance is not changing. But these decisions that are being made at the local level… are out of step with the science,” one reporter began. “So, why are we not hearing the same messaging criticizing states that are, you know, making these moves like we heard previously with, for instance, Ron DeSantis?”

“I would say there is a distinct difference between standing in the way, which Ron DeSantis did — or, Governor DeSantis, I’ll give him his full title — of teachers, school administrators and others taking steps to protect the students and their school communities,” Psaki answered. “There’s a difference between standing in the way of it — threatening to pull back funding — and allowing for local school districts to make choices, which is what a number of these states are doing.”

The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) wrote:

In a sense, the mask craze is largely about managing our fears. As my colleague Sean Malone recently observed, when people are afraid they’re much more willing to accept anything they believe might make them a little safer. Even really bad policies and ideas.

The illusion of safety. It’s a powerful thing. For both humans and governments, it would seem.

John F. Kennedy said, “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”

Masks don’t make us safer according to the data and science. However, the myth that they do is driving individuals, communities, government at all levels force We The People into believing that masks work.

What we are witnessing is mass formation psychosis.

Biden’s mask mandate war on we the people will continue and we the people will either succumb or fight back.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: GOP’s Youngkin Was Villain for Lifting Mask Mandate. Dem Phil Murphy a Hero for Doing the Same.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden May Permanently Ban Air Travel for People Who Had a Mask ‘Incident’ While Airborne

221 House Democrats Vote to Block “Unmask Our Kids Act”

James Carville Wants to Punch Unvaxxed in the Face: ‘You’re a Piece of Sh*t’

Pfizer Quietly Adds Warning That ‘Unfavorable Pre-Clinical, Clinical, or Safety Data’ May Impact Business

Blue States Back Down on Mandates

‘Mass Formation Psychosis’

Over-the-Counter Ivermectin? It Could Be Coming to a State Near You—Despite FDA Concerns

The ivermectin controversy has sparked a wider debate about medical freedom.


A new bill recently introduced in New Hampshire would allow residents to get ivermectin from pharmacies without first getting a prescription or approval from a doctor. The legislation, titled House Bill 1022, is still in committee, but the state House of Representatives is slated to vote on it in the coming weeks.

The purpose of the bill is to provide wider access to ivermectin for those who want to take it as a treatment for COVID-19. Thus far, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved the drug for treating COVID-19, but many believe it is an effective treatment and are eager to have it on hand should they be infected with the virus.

Though the FDA has not weighed in on this bill in particular, the agency has made it clear that they have serious concerns about the use of ivermectin for this purpose.

“The FDA has received multiple reports of patients who have required medical attention, including hospitalization, after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for livestock,” they write on their website. “Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19,” they continue. “There’s a lot of misinformation around, and you may have heard that it’s okay to take large doses of ivermectin. It is not okay.”

The caution isn’t only coming from the FDA, however. As Newsweek reports, “a number of medical experts testified in opposition to the bill during a legislative session [in January].”

Part of the opposition is undoubtedly due to concerns about safety and efficacy, but there are also concerns about what the bill specifically allows and requires. To address these, the House committee is considering certain bipartisan amendments, such as “requiring that patients who receive the drug are informed that its use for COVID-19 is ‘off-label’ and setting guidelines for tracking any adverse effects.”

Though ivermectin received very little attention when the pandemic first broke out, its use in treating COVID-19 has become increasingly well known, and, in recent months, polarizing. In particular, the drug garnered significant public attention when comedian and podcaster Joe Rogan disclosed in September that he was using it to treat COVID-19 after getting a prescription from his doctor.

Rogan’s announcement led many CNN commentators to claim he was taking “horse dewormer”, since the drug is often used to treat parasites in horses and other livestock. This was misleading, however, since the drug is also approved for human use to treat certain infections.

The whole spat came to a head when Joe Rogan interviewed Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN’s chief medical correspondent, in October. “Does it bother you that the network you work for out and out lied, just outright lied about me taking horse dewormer?” Rogan asked Gupta. “They shouldn’t have said that,” Gupta replied. “Why did they do that?” Rogan pressed. “I don’t know,” Gupta responded.

CNN’s rhetoric aside, the question of whether it’s appropriate to prescribe ivermectin to COVID-19 patients remains divisive. A doctor in Virginia, for instance, recently resigned from his position at a medical school after losing a court battle over whether he could prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19. Meanwhile, a doctor in Minnesota who recently served in the Minnesota Senate and is now running for governor is under investigation for prescribing the drug to COVID-19 patients. And in Canada, a doctor has had his medical license restricted because of his views on COVID-19, and one of the restrictions is that he is not allowed to prescribe ivermectin.

Despite the pushback, many doctors in the US continue to prescribe the drug for COVID-19. One such physician is Dr. Joseph Varon, who is the chief medical officer at United Memorial Medical Center in Houston. “My love for [ivermectin] is based on my personal use and good outcomes my patients have had,” Dr. Varon told the Houston Chronicle back in August. “Once you see it work, it is difficult to deny its usefulness.”

But while many doctors support the treatment, many others are strongly against it. For instance, Dr. A. Clinton White, a professor of infectious disease at University of Texas Medical Branch, has said many of the trials that seem to show the benefits of ivermectin were “deeply flawed and likely reflected biases.”

This statement about the trials is worth noting, because it gets at one of the core problems with the whole debate. The problem is that the safety and efficacy of this treatment is fundamentally an empirical question, one that most of us simply aren’t qualified to speak to. Typically, the solution to this problem is to rely on experts who can interpret the data for us. But when the experts themselves disagree, there’s not much we can do except hope that the results of future trials will be more conclusive.

But while the jury may be out regarding the empirical data, the ethics of making this drug available are a completely different question, and this is a question lay persons can weigh in on.

The argument for allowing people to access ivermectin, or any drug for that matter, rests on the principle of self-ownership. As Murray Rothbard explains in For a New Liberty, “the right to self-ownership asserts the absolute right of each man, by virtue of his (or her) being a human being, to ‘own’ his or her own body; that is, to control that body free of coercive interference.”

This may sound simple enough, but it has profound implications. If you really own your body, that means you and you alone have the right to decide what goes in it and what doesn’t. If someone coercively prevents you from taking a drug, they are effectively saying they have a higher claim on your life than you do. And that holds true whether that someone is acting by themselves or on behalf of a government.

“When we give government the power to make medical decisions for us,” said Ron Paul, “we in essence accept that the state owns our bodies.”

Another phrase that’s often used for the self-ownership position is bodily autonomy. Notably, the word “autonomy” comes from the Greek words auto, which means “self”, and nomos, which means “law.” So in essence, autonomy is about having a “self-law” or being “self-governing”.

Now, many people give lip service to the idea of bodily autonomy with phrases like “my body, my choice.” But holding that principle consistently means removing all restrictions about what people can do with their body. After all, you can’t be “self-governing” if you’re simultaneously being governed by other people.

Of course, some people will use their freedom to make bad choices and will have to suffer the consequences, but this is nothing new. We let people take all sorts of health and safety risks out of respect for their autonomy, such as with diet, alcohol consumption, smoking habits, and extreme sports.

And while some people may use their freedom to make bad choices, many others will use it to make good choices that the government is currently preventing them from making, such as taking drugs that could save their life.

Now, whether ivermectin is one of those lifesaving drugs is currently up for debate. But what shouldn’t be up for debate is each individual’s right to make their own medical decisions.

COLUMN BY

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ALERT: Israel Proves Covid ‘Vaccines’ are Ineffective and Dangerous – Boosters Must Stop!

INFOGRAPHIC: Approved and Non-FDA Approved COVID-19 Treatments

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Abrams Required Schoolkids to Mask Up So She Could Go Maskless

President-wannabe and voter fraud enthusiast Stacey Abrams, who sparked controversy by appearing maskless among dozens of masked-up children during a recent visit to a Georgia elementary school, did so “on the condition that everyone around her” wore a face covering — including the children, her campaign said.

Over the weekend, a photo surfaced showing the failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate grinning amid dozens of children at Glennwood Elementary School in Decatur. City Schools of Decatur mandate masks for students and employees. Nationwide outrage ensued.

“Her campaign said she wore a mask to the event and only removed it so she could be heard by students watching remotely and for a handful of photos on the condition that everyone around her was wearing face-coverings,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

Georgia gubernatorial candidate, former Sen. David Perdue (R-GA), slammed Abrams and other Democrats in an “Unmask Our Kids” digital ad, and changing his Twitter header to the now-infamous image of the unmasked Abrams surrounding by masked-up elementary school children. The photo includes the caption, “Unmask Our Kids.”

“In so many ways,” tweeted former Trump adviser Stephen Miller, “this picture embodies the elitism, arrogance, cruelty, science denial, and glib authoritarianism of Joe Biden’s Democrat Party.

He left out “blatant hypocrisy,” but otherwise, Miller’s message was spot on.


Stacey Abrams

32 Known Connections

Condemning America’s “Systemic Racism”

In July 2020, Abrams told The Washington Post:

“[W]rit large, our challenge in America is that justice does not get meted out equally. In fact, it doesn’t even humanize many blacks who are killed, particularly by those who are sworn to protect them. And so I think this racial moment we are having begins with this conversation of extrajudicial killings, but it cannot be divorced from the disproportionate number of deaths by black Americans based on COVID-19, the disproportionate effect of infection rates, and the economic collapse that is hurting black and brown communities at higher rates than anyone else, and the lack of attention being paid to the disproportionate number of people of color who also face voter suppression. The systemic racism that we see in our society is wrapped into everything from our environment to criminal justice to the application of justice, and the moment we try to say that these things are separate, we set ourselves up once again for the kind of protest and demonstrations we see now. But the extent to which we acknowledge that these are interwoven, through systemic racism, systemic inequities, and systemic injustice, then we can begin to start to address them.”

To learn more about Stacey Abrams, click here.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

MASS MURDER: A Medical System That Has Lost Its Direction and Soul

“People were dying, [yet] all of my ideas were getting shouted down. My superiors were showing up [to my clinical meetings] and getting me to stand down, because I was entertaining the idea that we should do this, that and the other thing, and they didn’t want anything to be done.” – Dr. Pierre Kory

“This is a war on cheap repurposed drugs.” –  Dr. Paul Marik before testifying on NH Bill that would make Ivermectin available OTC in NH.

“I never thought I’d see the day where doctors are censored, and patients are kept from care.” –  Dr. Peter McCullough

“An epidemic, either naturally caused or intentionally caused, is the most likely thing to cause…say…10 million excess deaths.” –  Bill Gates – 2017


Were we lied to about the number of deaths from Covid?  Yes!  Were the tests run at cycles too high to purposely show false positives? Yes!  Could someone pass the virus if asymptomatic? No!  Was social distancing valid?  No!  Were masks beneficial? No!  Was the lockdown effective in stopping the viral spread?  No!

Have nearly half of small businesses been destroyed? Yes!  Has the economy tanked?  Yes!  Have the big box stores benefitted? Yes! Has domestic abuse risen?  Yes!  Has drug addiction climbed?  Yes!  Have suicide rates escalated? Yes!  Have mental and physical problems risen?  Yes!  Have children lost IQ from the masking? Yes!  Are children disabled via speech impediments and learning disabilities because of the lockdowns and masking?  Yes!

Have the AMA, CDC, FDA, NIH protocols saved patients?  Hell no!  They have purposely murdered hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, who could have been saved.  The dissident doctors, scientists and healthcare workers know there are repurposed drugs (inexpensive and available) that could have saved up to 86% of those who perished.  Have those same stakeholders lied about Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin?  Yes, even Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine lied.

Have we been sold a lie via fear mongering and media propaganda?  Yes! Has the government enacted mandates that are unconstitutional?  Yes!  Has the Bill of Rights been violated?  Yes!

Are the COVID jabs dangerous to your health and wellbeing? Very!  Are the actuarial tables showing a rise in deaths of young people who had the jab?  Yes!  Are our soldiers being disabled by the jab? Yes! Have we been lied to from day one about the creation of this Wuhan virus and who is responsible?  Yes!

Was the CIA involved in planning this pandemic?  Yes!  Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s book, The Real Anthony Fauci, states that there were over 20 “pandemic” simulations beginning in 2000, and Bill Gates, Anthony Fauci and the CIA were involved in every one of them. “The CIA wrote the script, high-level CIA officials participated in every one of those pandemic simulations.”

Kennedy states, “So they practiced again and again and again: How to use the pandemic as a pretext for imposing totalitarian controls and for obliterating liberal democracy across the planet.”

This was all part of a decades-old globalist-devised blueprint for the future.

“New World System”

The previous two nightmare years were engineered decades ago and exposed in the 1960s.  Dr. Vernon Coleman’s short 17-minute video explains what the globalist architects were up to back then and where we are today…frighteningly close to completion!  He mentioned a dystopian lecture by Dr. Richard Day.

In March 1969, Dr. Richard Day, Professor of Pediatrics at Mt. Sinai Medical School in New York gave a chilling lecture about the “New World System.” Previously he had served as Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.  He told of future plans, whether as a forewarning or to unburden himself.  He spoke as though he had colluded with the blueprint designers.  His warnings for the future were uncannily accurate.

Dr. Lawrence Dunegan attended Dr. Day’s lecture. The audience was told not to take notes, but he later recorded his recollections of what was said by Dr. Day. Two of the three tapes made by Dr. Dunegan were transcribed and can be accessed at this website.  It’s all there, and we’re experiencing everything Dr. Day told the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society 53 years ago.  I urge you to fully peruse the website it as it contains vital information not included in this article.

Dr. Coleman exposed the highlights of Dr. Day’s lecture.  Day warned that in the future, the elderly would be eliminated by making it more difficult for them to access medical care.  He stated that social chaos would be promoted, travel would be restricted, hospitals would become jails, private medicine would be eliminated, the incidence of heart attacks would be deliberately increased, the world population would be reduced, information would be controlled, fake science would be used to promote the myth of global warming, there would be cameras everywhere, sports will become unisex, ID cards will be implanted, food supplies would be controlled, the weather would be controlled, and the people would be controlled.

He also warned that books would be banned and removed from libraries if they were considered dangerous.  Professor Day also stated that television sets would be able to watch the people who watch them and that new diseases would be deliberately introduced.

Dr. Coleman mentioned we were warned in the 80s that everyone would be affected by AIDS, and by the 2000s, medical organizations were constantly producing unsubstantiated scare stories.  Today the beat goes on…

Our Soulless Medical System

Dr. Dunegan was shocked when Dr. Day stated, “Some of you will think I’m talking about Communism. Well, what I’m talking about is much bigger than Communism!”

Of the over 40 topics discussed in the transcribed two tapes, I’ve included only a few of Dr. Dunegan’s statements, those that pertain to the medical industry.  My comments are in italics.

  • Limiting access to affordable medical care.

A big item that was elaborated on at some length was the cost of medical care would be made burdensomely high. Medical care would be connected very closely with one’s work but also would be made very, very high in cost so that it would simply be unavailable to people beyond a certain time. Unless they had a remarkably rich, supporting family, they would just have to do without care. And the idea was that if everybody says, “Enough! What a burden it is on the young to try to maintain the old people,” then the young would become agreeable to helping Mom and Dad along the way, provided this was done humanely and with dignity. Then the example was – there could be a nice farewell party, a real celebration. Mom and Dad had done a good job. Then after the party is over, they take the “demise pill.”

  • Planning the control over medicine.

There would be profound changes in the practice of medicine. Overall, medicine would be much more tightly controlled.  Insurance is the racket they’ve been using to control what you are allowed and not allowed.

This has already been exacerbated by Obama’s euphemistically named, “Affordable Care Act.”  The cost of insurance and thus medical care has risen exponentially, along with the cost of prescription medications.  More at the Link.

  • Elimination of private doctors.

The image of the doctor would change. No longer would he be seen as an individual professional in service to individual patients.  The doctor would be gradually recognized as a highly skilled technician – and his job would change. The job is to include things like executions by lethal injection.

Healthcare providers in other countries ravaged by COVID have decided that age 60 is the cut off age for life or for use of resources that can benefit younger patients.

Last December, New Zealand okayed euthanasia for COVID patients.

Nine states (CA, CO, HI, ME, NJ, NM, OR, VT, and WA) and DC legalized physician-assisted suicide via legislation.  One state, (MT) has legal physician-assisted suicide via court ruling.

The image of the doctor being a powerful, independent person would have to be changed. Dr. Richard Day went on to say, “Doctors are making entirely too much money. They should advertise like any other product.” Lawyers would be advertising too.

Lawyers already are advertising, and very few physicians still have single practices.  All of them are working for an employer in a group practice, which can advertise. 

Keep in mind, this was an audience of doctors; being addressed by a doctor. And it was interesting that he would make some rather insulting statements to his audience without fear of antagonizing us. The solo practitioner would become a thing of the past.

They have.

A few die-hards might try to hold out, but most doctors would be employed by an institution of one kind or another. Group practice would be encouraged, corporations would be encouraged, and then once the corporate image of medical care gradually became more and more acceptable, doctors would more and more become employees rather than independent contractors. Along with that, of course, unstated but necessary, is the employee serves his employer, not his patient.

  • New difficult to diagnose and untreatable diseases.

The next heading to talk about is Health and Disease. Day said there would be new diseases to appear which had not ever been seen before. They would be very difficult to diagnose and be untreatable – at least for a long time. No elaboration was made on this, but I remember, not long after hearing this presentation, when I had a puzzling diagnosis to make, I would be wondering, “Is this a case of what he was talking about?” Some years later AIDS developed. I think AIDS was at least one example of what he was talking about. I now think that AIDS probably was a manufactured disease.

Covid has never been isolated, neither have any of the so-called “variants.”

  • Suppressing cancer cures as a means of population control.

Cancer. He said, “We can cure almost every cancer right now. Information is on file in the Rockefeller Institute, if it’s ever decided that it should be released. But consider – if people stop dying of cancer, how rapidly we would become overpopulated. You may as well die of cancer as of something else.”  Efforts at cancer treatment would be geared more toward comfort than toward cure. There was some statement that ultimately the cancer cures which were being hidden in the Rockefeller Institute would come to light because independent researchers might bring them out, despite these efforts to suppress them. But at least for the time being, letting people die of cancer was a good thing to do because it would slow down the problem of overpopulation.

And there’s all the money made from those stricken with the disease.

  • Inducing heart attacks as a form of assassination.

Another very interesting thing was heart attacks. Day said, “There is now a way to simulate a real heart attack. It can be used as a means of assassination.” Only a very skilled pathologist who knew exactly what to look for at an autopsy, could distinguish this from the real thing. I thought that was a very surprising and shocking thing to hear from this particular man at that particular time. This, and the business of the cancer cure, really still stand out sharply in my memory, because they were so shocking and, at that time, seemed to me out of character.

He then went on to talk about nutrition and exercise sort of in the same framework. People would have to eat right and exercise right to live as long as before. Most won’t. In retrospect, I tend to think he meant high salt diets and high fat diets would predispose toward high blood pressure and premature arteriosclerotic heart disease. And that if people who were too dumb or too lazy to exercise as they should, then their circulating fats go up and predispose to disease.

Dr. Day also said something about diet information would be widely available, but most people, particularly stupid people, who had no right to continue living anyway, would ignore the advice and just go on and eat what was convenient and tasted good. There were some other unpleasant things said about food. I just can’t recall what they were. But I do remember having reflections about wanting to plant a garden in the backyard to get around whatever these contaminated foods would be. I regret I don’t remember the details about nutrition and hazardous nutrition.

Researchers are now putting COVID mRNA vaccines in lettuce, spinach and edible plants to vaccinate the unvaxxed.

Anybody who was lazy enough to want convenience foods rather than fixing his own also had better be energetic enough to exercise. Because if he was too lazy to exercise and too lazy to fix his own food, then he didn’t deserve to live very long.

This was all presented as sort of a moral judgement about people and what they should do with their energies. People who are smart, who would learn about nutrition, and who are disciplined enough to eat right and exercise right are better people – and the kind you want to live longer.

Look at the rise in heart attacks with the COVID vax, not to mention a shortened life because of myocarditis, pericarditis, and a destroyed immune system.

Professor Day also mentioned the need for more jails, and using hospitals as jails.  Hospitals could serve as jails. Some new hospital construction would be designed so as to make them adaptable to jail-like use.

Haven’t we already seen this very thing happen to many elderly patients and only by the grace of God have families and attorneys gotten them out of these new COVID-death prisons.  Attorneys Report Spike in Calls for Help from Families of Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

All of this was forecast in 1969, and nearly everything Dr. Day lectured about has already happened…and at an increasingly accelerated rate.  Today, medical care for the un-jabbed is being denied, social credits are being introduced, and the mandatory childhood jabs are on their way to kill or sterilize our children.  Babies and toddlers are next.

What has occurred in the last two years is a culmination of these plans. The hospital protocols for COVID are a death sentence and the unvaxxed “pure bloods” are also paying a hefty price.

Vax Mandates

A three year old boy was denied heart surgery in Germany, the UK and Israel because his parents weren’t “vaccinated.”  Finally, he was flown to Greece where the surgery was performed.

A Boston hospital refused a 31-year-old man a heart transplant because he did not want to be inoculated with C-19 jabs.  One look at the myocarditis and pericarditis stats after these vax injections would deter anyone, yet medical personnel, who are supposed to stay informed, either know nothing, or continue to protect themselves rather than their patients.  They follow their employers’ mandates.

Cleveland Clinic has made it mandatory for anyone receiving a transplant to be Covid jabbed.  A kidney transplant became available for Mike Ganim via a friend of the family.  But then devastating news was dropped on them when Cleveland Clinic said the donor had to have the C-19 vax in order to “protect” everyone.  The donor had religious reasons, including freedom, for her refusal of this inoculation.

The U.S. Navy is violating a court order by allegedly blocking treatment for a traumatic brain injury and inflicting other forms of punishment on SEALs who requested religious exemptions to the coronavirus “vaccine,” according to a new legal complaint.

Adverse Effects and Fatalities

The military’s mandated injections resulted in a high rate of disorders, ailments and death, as well as the onset of COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia, and over 100 other conditions.

The findings of the Department of Defense (DOD) whistleblowers, as told to attorney Thomas Renz, are consistent with remarks from OneAmerica CEO J. Scott Davison, who stated during a call hosted by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce and the Indiana Hospital Association that “working age people (18 to 64) are dying at a rate that is 40% higher than pre-pandemic rates.”

Healthy young sports figures are dying because of the vax; 108 FIFA footballers and over 400 athletes dead from heart failure in six months.

Journalist and commentator Daniel Horowitz, who spoke with attorney Renz before Senator Ron Johnson’s panel discussion, explained in an article published January 26th that the doctors “queried the numbers for hundreds of codes from 2016 through 2020 to establish a baseline five-year average.”

An alarming increase in cancer, miscarriages and myocarditis was found in addition to many other diseases (as outlined in Senator Ron Johnson’s letter to DOD Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III).

  • Hypertension — 2,181% increase
  • Diseases of the nervous system — 1,048% increase
  • Malignant neoplasms of esophagus — 894% increase
  • Multiple sclerosis — 680% increase
  • Malignant neoplasms of digestive organs — 624% increase
  • Guillain-Barre syndrome — 551% increase
  • Breast cancer — 487% increase
  • Demyelinating — 487% increase
  • Malignant neoplasms of thyroid and other endocrine glands — 474% increase
  • Female infertility — 472% increase
  • Pulmonary embolism— 468% increase
  • Migraines — 452% increase
  • Ovarian dysfunction — 437% increase
  • Testicular cancer — 369% increase
  • Tachycardia — 302% increase

Medical Propaganda

There are hundreds of thousands of incidences of hospital protocols for COVID patients and those who received the jabs resulting in death.  COVID fatalities are kept high despite available repurposed drugs and OTC supplements. Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine and supplements are cheap, can be used at home, will keep you out of hospital and are on the WHO’s Model List of Essential Medicines.  These effective medications have purposely been maligned, not only by the media, the snakeholders and the majority of medical caregivers, but by The Lancet medical journal and the New England Journal of Medicine.

Robert Kennedy Jr. states, “Somebody at the very pinnacle of the medical cartel had twisted arms, kicked groins, and stoved in kneecaps to force these periodicals to abandon their policies, shred their ethics, and spend down their centuries of hard-won credibility in a desperate bid to torpedo HCQ.  To date, neither the authors of the false anti-HCQ claims, nor the journals, have explained who induced them to coauthor and publish the most momentous fraud in the history of scientific publishing.”

The globalist goals were always pointed at a “vaccine,” where billions would funnel into the pockets of Gates, Fauci, and their friends in Big Pharma.  Thus, the maligning of repurposed wonder drugs, and the murder of millions was accomplished to fill the coffers of the depopulation enemies of freedom and complete the Great Reset.

Conclusion

There can be only one conclusion.  Mass Murder was planned and we are the prey.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

Today is the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation

We are constantly told the opposite by propagandists in the West, but the reality is that female genital mutilation (FGM) is justified in Islamic law. It is practiced by some non-Muslims, but only in majority-Muslim areas where the influence of Islamic culture, mores and law is all-pervasive.

“It is a religious thing. Do you want to change religion?” said one Egyptian in response to a campaign to eradicate female genital mutilation. “You only listen to what the West is saying.”

The establishment media ignores the fact that FGM is mandated in Islamic law: “Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr ‘clitoris’ [this is called khufaadh ‘female circumcision’]).” — Umdat al-Salik e4.3, translated by Mark Durie, The Third Choice, p. 64

Why is it obligatory? Because Muhammad is held to have said so: “Abu al- Malih ibn Usama’s father relates that the Prophet said: ‘Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women.’” — Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 5:75

“Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: ‘Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.’” — Abu Dawud 41:5251

That hadith is classified as weak, but this one is classified as sahih (reliable): “Aishah narrated: ‘When the circumcised meets the circumcised, then indeed Ghusl is required. Myself and Allah’s Messenger did that, so we performed Ghusl.’” — Jami` at-Tirmidhi 108

If Muhammad had the genitals of his favorite wife, Aisha, mutilated, that is a strong endorsement of the practice from the man who is an “excellent example” (Qur’an 33:21) for Muslims.

Why does it matter whether or not FGM is Islamic? Because the practice will never be eradicated if its root causes are not confronted. As long as those Muslims continue to believe that Allah and Muhammad want it done, for some that will override all other considerations, in the United States and everywhere else.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLE: Muslim cleric defends capital punishment for those who leave Islam

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Spain’s First Study on Omicron Finds Vaccinated People Spread COVID at Same Rate as Unvaccinated

Several governments in Spain scrapped COVID passports following the study’s release.


The first Spanish study on how the Omicron variant of COVID-19 infects, incubates, and transmits was recently concluded by the Public Health Observatory of Cantabria.

The findings, which have not yet been peer reviewed, show that the highly infectious variant accounted for nearly half of the infections recorded during the whole pandemic. One reason Omicron has proven so transmissible, researchers discovered, is that the window for transmission is earlier than previous variants.

“Half of the infections occurred before the onset of symptoms,” researchers said.

The early stage transmission, scientists noted, complicates some mitigation efforts.

“This would imply that the effectiveness of measures such as screening, rapid testing or isolation would decrease significantly in the absence of preventive measures such as distance, limiting mass gatherings or social gatherings,” researchers said.

Perhaps the most consequential finding in the research, however, is that vaccines did not appear to reduce the spread of the virus.

“Vaccinated cases seem to have the same transmission capacity as unvaccinated people,” researchers concluded, according to EITB Radio Televisión Pública Vasca (the Basque Autonomous Community’s public broadcast service).

This is a departure from the Delta variant, researchers said, where transmission differences were found in vaccinated households and workplaces.

The study was based on 622 Omicron cases (and their 1,420 contacts) detected in Cantabria, a region on Spain’s north coast, in December 2021.

The findings out of Spain are just the latest example of why COVID-19 continues to spread despite human ingenuity and the widespread efforts of central planners to tame the virus.

Unlike previous pandemics, governments around the world took sweeping actions to restrict basic freedoms out of fear of the deadly pathogen. Businesses were closed, speech restricted, free assembly denied, and bodily autonomy was violated.

Despite these efforts the virus, now in its third year, continues to rage, and in many parts of the world governments have been slow to rescind harmful policies despite their ineffectiveness.

To its credit, parts of Spain have proven much more responsive than other parts of the world.

Last week, public health officials in Catalonia, an autonomous province in northeast Spain, and several other provinces, announced they were scrapping vaccine passports in light of this new evidence.

A committee of scientists told Catalonia’s regional government that because of the nature of Omicron, “a large part of the population is once again susceptible to getting infected whether or not they are vaccinated or have already had the illness.”

“The effectiveness of the compulsory use of the Covid certificate is reduced as an extra level of security,” scientists added.

The requirement to show a COVID passport had been in place since November in Catalonia, the second most-populous community in Spain, with some 7.7 million people. Smaller regions in Spain, such as Cantabria and Asturias, also have reportedly announced they will no longer require COVID passports for people to enter bars, restaurants, and other public spaces.

European media point out that Spain has suffered from widespread Omicron outbreaks even though the country boasts one of the higher vaccination rates in the world.

“Despite high levels of vaccination in Spain where 90.7 percent of people over the age of 12 are fully immunised,” The Local reports, “coronavirus cases exploded in Spain over the Christmas holidays, giving it one of Europe’s highest incidence rates.

The decision to scrap the vaccine passport follows widespread protests in Spain against vaccine passports and mask mandates.

While the effectiveness of vaccines in slowing the spread is questionable, there is still an abundance of evidence suggesting that vaccines can significantly reduce the likelihood of falling seriously ill from COVID-19.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine who studies epidemiology at Stanford University, credits his own speedy recovery from COVID to the vaccines and has praised them as “a wonderful achievement.”

But Bhattacharya has said vaccines are primarily a matter of personal health, not public health, since the benefits of vaccination lay primarily with the individual, and has argued that efforts to mandate vaccination erode confidence in public health.

“Opposition to discriminatory vaccine mandates is not the same as opposition to vaccines,” Bhattacharya said last year. “On the contrary, support for vaccine mandates is an anti-vax position because it breeds distrust and resentment toward public health.”

The new research out of Spain, combined with recent data from the CDC that show natural immunity confers more protection from some COVID variants than vaccines, reveals the folly of these coercive policies.

Vaccine passports are inherently unjust because free people require free movement, but they become both unjust and ridiculous when they fail to reduce the transmission of the virus or account for natural immunity.

Provinces in Spain that are rescinding their vaccine passport policies in light of this new evidence deserve some credit, because this does not come naturally to state planners.

In his work Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, the economist Ludwig von Mises noted how difficult it is for bureaucrats to relinquish control over their own plans.

“What those calling themselves planners advocate is not the substitution of planned action for letting things go. It is the substitution of the planner’s own plan for the plans of his fellow-men,” Mises wrote. “The planner is a potential dictator who wants to deprive all other people of the power to plan and act according to their own plans. He aims at one thing only: the exclusive absolute pre-eminence of his own plan.”

For those wondering why many countries continue to use coercive policies even in light of this new evidence, the words of Mises offer a beam of understanding.

Fortunately, many countries around the world—including the United KingdomDenmark, and the Czech Republic—are beginning to see the error and injustice of these coercive measures.

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

WATCH: Cowboys Join Truckers Freedom Convoy

How perfect! The cavalry has arrived.

RELATED TWEET: Canada has now officially become a totalitarian police state.

RELATED VIDEO: Florida’s Ron DeSantis supports the Canadian Freedom Trucker’s Protest!

RELATED ARTICLES:

GiveSendGo fundraiser for Freedom Convoy surpasses $5 million after GoFundMe shuts page down

Ottawa Mayor Declares State Of Emergency, Police Threaten To Arrest Anyone Supplying Truckers With Fuel

58,000+ Truckers Join MASSIVE Convoy to Protest and Defy Mandates – This Would Wreck Supply Chain

GoFundMe backtracks on redistributing money for Canadian truckers, under threat of fraud investigation

Freedom Goes GLOBAL

Facebook Shuts Down U.S. Trucker Convoy Group

GoFundMe Steals $10 Million In Donations From Truckers

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

UK Government Report: Children up to 52 times more likely to die following a COVID shot

Data from Britain’s Office for National Statistics show a stark increase in deaths among children both single- and double-jabbed compared to their un-jabbed counterparts……as the Democrat regime in America pushes for mandates for children and babies.

British children up to 52 times more likely to die following a COVID shot: gov’t report

By: LifeSite News | Feb 2, 2022 | David McLoone

Data from Britain’s Office for National Statistics show a stark increase in deaths among children both single- and double-jabbed compared to their un-jabbed counterparts..

Britain’s Office for National Statistics (ONS) has released data indicating that children who received the COVID-19 jabs have suffered a death rate 54 times greater than that of their un-jabbed counterparts.

In December, the ONS published age-standardized data on the mortality rates of individuals in 5-year age sets in Britain, grouped by their “vaccination” status for the COVID-19 shots. The data accounts for the period from January 1 to October 31, 2021.

The ONS tabulated “Monthly age-standardised mortality rates by age-group and vaccination status for deaths involving COVID-19, per 100,000 person-years” but presented the data only for ages 18 and over. However, the jabs are available to children as young as 12, and those children are allowed to receive the shot against their parents’ wishes. In limited cases, children as young as 5 have been given a reduced dosage of the shots.

Nevertheless, as noted by The Exposé, a separate table outlining “deaths and person-years by vaccination status” includes 5-year age groups from 10-years-old and up. From the data provided, a calculation of the mortality rate per 100,000 person-years can be made.

The rate per 100,000 person-years delineation is used in preference over the simpler 100,000 population calculation to better represent the mortality rates over a specific period of time, as people in one “vaccination” group – such as un-jabbed, single-jabbed, and double-jabbed – soon move into the next group.

Table 9 of the ONS report shows the “deaths and person-years by vaccination status and five-year age group” for the entire ten-month period. According to the report, the un-jabbed 10–14-year-old group represents 2,094,711 person-years, and the 15–19 age set 1,587,072 person-years over the same time.

[ … ]

From the above table the 100,000 person-years calculation can be made, with the younger group coming out at 20.9 un-jabbed per 100,000 person-years and the older group at 15.9. Following this, the mortality rate per 100,000 person-years is worked out by dividing the number of deaths within each group by the 100,000 person-years calculation.

The result is that for the 10–14 year group, the un-jabbed mortality per 100,000 person-years is 4.6 while the un-jabbed mortality rate per 100,000 person-years for the 15–19 group is 10.1.

Using the same data set and calculation, the mortality rate for 10­–14-year-olds who received one dose of the jabs suffered a 45.1 per 100,000 person-years death rate, while 15–19-year-olds with one jab suffered 18.3 deaths per 100,00 person-years.

… Among those who received two doses of the COVID jabs in both young age groups, the death rates were higher still, with 32.9 deaths per 100,000 person-years among the 15–19 age group and a staggering 238.4 deaths per 100,000 person-years among 10–14-year-olds in the U.K.

The data show a stark increase in deaths among children both single- and double-jabbed compared to their un-jabbed counterparts. For children aged 15–19, the risk of death increases by almost double if they take the first shot and by over three times if they take the second.

[ … ]

10–14-year-olds, on the other hand, run the risk of dying almost by a factor of ten following the first dose while the second dose brings a 51.8 times greater risk of death than if they had remained un-jabbed.

On average, it means that children between 10 and 19 years of age who had received at least one shot of the COVID jabs had a 3.7 times greater chance of dying between January and October last year.

[ … ]

Additionally, according to the ONS’ “five-year average weekly deaths by sex and age group” figures between 2015 and 2019 among children ages 10-14, recorded deaths have risen by 44 percent above the average in weekly figures provided by the ONS for 2021.

The JCVI, an independent adviser to the U.K. government on immunization programs, determined in a September 3 statement that the “available evidence indicates that the individual health benefits from COVID-19 vaccination are small in those aged 12 to 15 years.” They added that any benefit granted by the shots is only “marginally greater than the potential known harms,” while acknowledging that “there is considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude of the potential harms.”

Given the uncertainty of risks involved with the COVID shots, the JCVI considered the benefits “too small to support advice on a universal programme of vaccination of otherwise healthy 12- to 15-year-old children at this time.”

Moreover, COVID shot trials have never produced evidence that the vaccines stop infection or transmission. They do not even claim to reduce hospitalization, but the measurement of success is in preventing severe symptoms of COVID-19 disease. Indeed, there is strong evidence that the “vaccinated” are just as likely to carry and transmit the virus as the unvaccinated.

Many Catholics and other Christians have rejected the currently available COVID inoculations because they were developed or tested using cell lines derived from aborted children.

RELATED VIDEO: CDC data reveals vaccines are killing far more children than China virus itself

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Virginia Supreme Court throws out challenge to Youngkin mask order

The Lockdown Takedown: New Study Finally Isolates Facts

Freedom on Furlough: Biden Ousts Military’s Unvaxxed

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Israeli Coronavirus Expert: 70-80% of Most Severe Cases Vaccinated at Least Three Times

And yet the Democrats are double down on their efforts to mandate these dangerous shots.

Israeli Coronavirus expert: 70-80% of most severe cases vaccinated at least three times

By Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz | Israel 365 | Feb 4, 2022 |

Prof. Yaakov Jerris, director of Ichilov Hospital’s coronavirus ward, told Channel 13 News that the majority of serious cases were vaccinated patients.

“Right now, most of our severe cases are vaccinated,” Jerris said on Channel 13 News. “They had at least three injections. Between seventy and eighty percent of the serious cases are vaccinated. So, the vaccine has no significance regarding severe illness, which is why just twenty to twenty-five percent of our patients are unvaccinated.”

Professor Jerris also related to an issue in reporting that has been revealed to be prevalent in reporting data. Speaking at a cabinet meeting on Sunday, he told ministers, “Defining a serious patient is problematic. For example, a patient with a chronic lung disease always had a low level of oxygen, but now he has a positive coronavirus test result which technically makes him a ‘serious coronavirus patient,’ but that’s not accurate. The patient is only in a difficult condition because he has a serious underlying illness.”

Jerris’s statements are consistent with a German government report that found that found more than 78.6% of reported cases of the omicron COVID-19 variant in the country were in vaccinated individuals. Four thousand and twenty people who reported contracting Omicron in the study – which equates to 95.6 percent of total cases – had received at least two doses of COVID-19 vaccines, meaning the vaccinated were 3.7 times more likely to contract the variant.

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK Government Report: Children up to 52 times more likely to die following a COVID shot

European Nations Are Dismantling the COVID State Before Our Eyes. Will the U.S. Follow?

Coming to grips with the facts about masks

VIDEO: COVID Cases Inflated For Profit?

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

European Nations Are Dismantling the COVID State Before Our Eyes. Will the U.S. Follow?

Denmark took the lead in Europe this week, scrapping virtually all pandemic restrictions as the Scandinavian country of 5 million announced it no longer considers COVID-19 “a socially critical disease.”

Denmark’s move came the same week that health ministers in the United Kingdom announced plans to terminate an order forcing all NHS staff to get vaccinated against COVID, a move The Guardian said is designed to “prevent an exodus of thousands of frontline health workers.” The move came days after the UK scrapped its school mask mandate.

Not to be outdone, Finland’s Prime Minister Sanna Marin recently told reporters the country would be retiring COVID passports and, according to Reuters, aims “to remove all restrictions at the start of next month.”

Meanwhile, public health officials in Norway also said the country would be lifting nearly all of its COVID restrictions, including COVID tests at the border. Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere told reporters that even though COVID infections remain high, hospitalizations have stabilized and most citizens have some protection from the virus because of previous infections and vaccination.

“Even if many more people are becoming infected, there are fewer who are hospitalised,” Stoere explained. “We’re well protected by vaccines. This means that we can relax many measures even as infections are rising rapidly.”

The Czech Republic, meanwhile, recently scrapped its vaccine mandate, while several provinces in Spain also ditched virtually all COVID restrictions after a study conducted by the Public Health Observatory of Cantabria found vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals transmit the virus at similar rates.

Not all European nations have scrapped their COVID policies, however. In fact, some appear intent to move in the opposite direction.

Austria, for example, is becoming the first European country to make COVID vaccination compulsory for all adults. Greece, meanwhile, has announced it will fine adults over 60 who do not comply with vaccination; and Germany’s incoming chancellor, Social Democrat Olaf Scholz, has indicated he will support a COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

In Belgium, authorities have only grudgingly begun to rollback COVID restrictions, despite protests in Brussels of some 50,000 who gathered to oppose the state’s mandates.

“I’m angry about the blackmail that the government is doing,” protester Caroline van Landuyt told Reuters.

The rally in Brussels ended with police using tear gas and a water cannon to disperse those who’d assembled in protest, culminating in 60 people being arrested and 12 protesters being taken to hospital (as well as three police officers).

Why are many European nations dismantling their COVID restrictions while others are ramping up new mandates? While many are loath to admit it, it’s becoming increasingly clear that state attempts to control the virus have failed miserably.

A new Johns Hopkins metaanalysis, for instance, found that the lockdowns many countries embraced were a massive failure, resulting in “little to no effect” on COVID mortality, even though they came with immense collateral damage. A United Nations report published last year noted that COVID disruptions resulted in some 239,000 “maternal and child deaths” in South Asia alone, while the US saw a record number of drug overdoses, a surge in youth suicide, and an unprecedented drop in cancer screenings that will be felt for years to come.

While the vaccines have helped reduce COVID deaths and hospitalizations, they have done little to slow the spread of COVID, in large part because of the nature of Omicron, which is highly transmissible.

A committee of scientists who advised the regional government of Catalonia pointed out that Omicron, which has a high rate of transmission even before carriers experience an onset of symptoms, has rendered vaccine passports largely ineffective at reducing transmission because vaccinated individuals spread the virus at similar rates to unvaccinated ones.

“The effectiveness of the compulsory use of the Covid certificate is reduced as an extra level of security,” the scientists noted.

In other words, vaccines can protect individuals because they can reduce the likelihood of hospitalization or death from COVID, but they do little to slow or stop transmission. This makes vaccines primarily a matter of personal health, not public health.

It takes incredible arrogance for lawmakers and bureaucrats to assume they know what is best for individuals. But that quality—arrogance—is precisely what we’ve seen since the very beginning of this pandemic.

“To think one can [suppress] a very contagious respiratory virus is stupid and arrogant,” Harvard epidemologist Martin Kulldorff recently noted on Twitter. “We need leaders that are smart and humble.”

The last word there—humble—is important.

In his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize entitled The Pretense of Knowledge, the economist F.A. Hayek warned that a lack of humility could lead modern man “to do more harm than good in his efforts to improve the social order.” With the power of the state at his fingertips, combined with his command of the sciences, Hayek feared modern man would fail to realize that there are limits to his knowledge and to his ability to shape society effectively.

“There is danger in the exuberant feeling of ever growing power which the advance of the physical sciences has engendered and which tempts man to try, ‘dizzy with success’, to use a characteristic phrase of early communism, to subject not only our natural but also our human environment to the control of a human will,” Hayek noted.

Hayek concluded his remarks with a warning. The student of society should learn “a lesson of humility” by recognizing “the insuperable limits to his knowledge.” If he failed this test of humility, the fatal striving to control society stood to make man “a tyrant over his fellows…[and] the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals.”

Hayek’s fear, one presumes, was of socialism. The COVID state, however, was born of the same hubris—the belief that central planners could use the power of the state to suppress and vanquish a highly contagious respiratory virus, something never tried before in human history.

Regrettably, yet predictably, the COVID state failed, and its mad experiment caused grave damage to society and science. Many European countries are finally accepting this reality, at least tacitly. But as for the Biden administration, it’s still unclear whether they understand the crux of the problem.

On Wednesday, the US Army announced soldiers who refuse vaccination for COVID-19 will be discharged—regardless of whether they’ve already had COVID (which the CDC admits offers powerful protection from the virus).

Many US Army soldiers will be left with a bitter choice, just like Katharina Teufel-Lieli, an Austrian musician who is one of tens of thousands in that country who have joined demonstrations to resist making the COVID vaccine compulsory.

Austrians face fines up to $4,100 if they don’t comply with the government’s order, but Teufel-Lieli says she’ll not bow to the pressure.

“I have the right to decide over my body… to simply say ‘no,'” the harpist recently told Agence France-Presse at her home near Salzburg.

Fortunately, more and more people in Europe and beyond are beginning to agree with her.

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israeli Coronavirus Expert: 70-80% of Most Severe Cases Vaccinated at Least Three Times

CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, WaPo, ABC, CBS, NBC completely IGNORE Johns Hopkins study finding COVID lockdowns ineffective

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

SISSY WATCH USA: VICE, University of Cambridge, PLoS ONE and Pantyhose Masks

A reader sent us a February 3, 2022 VICE article titled “Scientists Find Putting Pantyhose on Your Head Makes Your Mask Safer” by staff writer Samantha Cole. Samantha wrote:

In 2020, researchers from the University of Cambridge started testing out some of the ways people might adjust face masks to make them fit better on their faces. Their findings were finally released as a peer-reviewed study this week in the journal PLoS ONE. [Emphasis added]

At first we thought this was political satire but after reading the article we decided to add VICE, the University of Cambridge, the journal PLoS ONE and pantyhose masks to our growing list of Sissy Watch USA members.

The journal PLoS ONE concluded:

Fit hacks can be used to effectively improve the fit of surgical and KN95 masks, enhancing the protection provided to the wearer. However, many of the most effective hacks are very uncomfortable and unlikely to be tolerated for extended periods of time. The development of effective fit-improvement solutions remains a critical issue in need of further development. [Emphasis added]

QUESTION: Fit hacks? Pantyhose Masks Really?

Perhaps Samantha got it right when she ended here column with,

If someone can figure out how to combine the fetish market for crotch-scented masks with the improved safety of a better fit, they would have a real seller on their hands.

Are Masks and Mask Mandates Effective?

James D. Agresti, the president and cofounder of Just Facts, a think tank dedicated to publishing rigorously documented facts about public policy issues, in a column titled “Coming to grips with the facts about masks” wrote:

Allegations that “masks work” and “don’t cause harm” have been enforced by governments and corporations around the world for more than 18 months through arrestsfiringscensorshipfines, and denial of access to schoolssupermarketshospitalsstreets, and other public spaces. This has made it virtually impossible for many people to live without complying with mask mandates.

But scientific research shows that masks and mask mandates don’t work at all.

Dr. Vinay Prasad—an associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco—has written an article that examines the scientific evidence for masking children and concludes that:

  • “most of the masks worn by most kids for most of the pandemic have likely done nothing to change the velocity or trajectory of the virus.”
  • “there are downsides to face coverings for pupils and students, including detrimental impacts on communication in the classroom.”
  • “masking is now little more than an appealing delusion.”
  • decisions to mask schoolchildren are “ignorant, cruel, fearful, and cowardly.”

Dr. Chad Roy, who specializes in airborne infectious diseases and is a professor of microbiology and immunology at Tulane University School of Medicine, has told the Washington Examiner that:

  • “cloth and surgical masks do absolutely nothing for protection from ambient virus.”
  • “all this song and dance of wearing cloth masks with some presumption that you’re being protected from ambient virus is completely and positively 100% counter to how masks and respirators work.”

Anew study published in the The Southern Medical Journal (SMJ) found that a county-wide mask order in Bexar County, Texas, did not lead to a reduction in COVID-19 hospitalization rates or deaths.

The study, which was peer reviewed, analyzed data before and after mandates were imposed at both the state level (July 3, 2020) and in Bexar County (July 5, 2020), Texas’s fourth largest county.

“We defined the control period as June 2 to July 2 and the postmask order period as July 8, 2020–August 12, 2020, with a 5-day gap to account for the median incubation period for cases; longer periods of 7 and 10 days were used for hospitalization and ICU admission/death, respectively,” the study authors wrote. “Data were reported on a per-100,000 population basis using respective US Census Bureau–reported populations.”

Authors of the study, which was reviewed by the US Army Institute of Surgical Research, analyzed the daily average number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, ICU visits, patients on ventilators, and deaths, and concluded the policy did not reduce any of these metrics.

“All of the measured outcomes were higher on average in the postmask period as were covariables included in the adjusted model,” the researchers said. “There was no reduction in per-population daily mortality, hospital bed, ICU bed, or ventilator occupancy of COVID-19-positive patients attributable to the implementation of a mask-wearing mandate.”

The Bottom Line

Masks don’t work to stop a virus like Covid. Period.

To understand please read COVID-19 Masks: How Effective and How Safe?

WATCH: Dan Ball with Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe, COVID Corruption Exposed

On December 12th, 2020 the National Library of Medicine released a study titled “COVID-19: smoke testing of surgical mask and respirators” by J D M DouglasN McLeanC HorsleyG HigginsC M Douglas E Robertson which concluded:

Results: The Fluid Resistant Surgical Mask gave no protection to inhaled smoke particles. Modifications with tape and three mask layers gave slight benefit but were not considered practical. FFP3 gave complete protection to inhaled smoke but strap tension needs to be ‘just right’ to prevent facial trauma. Facial barrier creams are an infection risk.

Conclusions: Surgical masks give no protection to respirable particles. Emerging evidence on cough clouds and health care worker deaths suggests the implementation of a precautionary policy of FFP3 for all locations exposed to symptomatic or diagnosed COVID-19 patients. PPE fit testing and usage policy need to improve to include daily buddy checks for FFP3 users.

So there you have it. But, if you have a fetish for crotch scented masks then go for it. Otherwise, just wash your hands frequently.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Jersey mom, forced to get vaccine before a family wedding, ends up in the ER

Fired Pharmaceutical Workers Explain Why They Didn’t Get COVID-19 Shots

‘80% of serious COVID cases are fully vaccinated’: Israel, One of Most Vaccinated Countries in the World, Sets New COVID-19 Case Record

Covid-19 vaccine negative reactions

John Hopkins Releases BOMBSHELL Study on Lockdown Effectiveness

Armed Police Raid “Illegal” German School Over Failure to Mask, Register With Government

RELATED VIDEOS:

Global Vaccine Summit: Opening Remarks from Bill Gates

We may add Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti to our Sissy Watch USA list.

Coming to grips with the facts about masks

Public health advice has not caught up with the latest research.


Allegations that “masks work” and “don’t cause harm” have been enforced by governments and corporations around the world for more than 18 months through arrestsfiringscensorshipfines, and denial of access to schoolssupermarketshospitalsstreets, and other public spaces. This has made it virtually impossible for many people to live without complying with mask mandates.

In recent weeks, however, more medical scholars and media outlets are coming to grips with facts about masks that Just Facts has been documenting for more than a year and painstakingly compiled in a September 2021 article sourced with more than 50 peer-reviewed science journals. Here’s a sample of people who are speaking up about the facts and their implications:

Dr. Vinay Prasad—an associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco—has written an article that examines the scientific evidence for masking children and concludes that:

  • “most of the masks worn by most kids for most of the pandemic have likely done nothing to change the velocity or trajectory of the virus.”
  • “there are downsides to face coverings for pupils and students, including detrimental impacts on communication in the classroom.”
  • “masking is now little more than an appealing delusion.”
  • decisions to mask schoolchildren are “ignorant, cruel, fearful, and cowardly.”

Dr. Chad Roy, who specializes in airborne infectious diseases and is a professor of microbiology and immunology at Tulane University School of Medicine, has told the Washington Examiner that:

  • “cloth and surgical masks do absolutely nothing for protection from ambient virus.”
  • “all this song and dance of wearing cloth masks with some presumption that you’re being protected from ambient virus is completely and positively 100% counter to how masks and respirators work.”

The Atlantic has published an analysis of school masking policies by three medical scholars—including Dr. Margery Smelkinson, a specialist in infectious diseases at the National Institutes of Health—in which they wrote:

  • “We reviewed a variety of studies—some conducted by the CDC itself, some cited by the CDC as evidence of masking effectiveness in a school setting, and others touted by media to the same end—to try to find evidence that would justify the CDC’s no-end-in-sight mask guidance for the very-low-risk pediatric population, particularly post-vaccination. We came up empty-handed.”
  • The “overall takeaway from these studies—that schools with mask mandates have lower Covid-19 transmission rates than schools without mask mandates—is not justified by the data that have been gathered.”
  • “As with our existing school-mask policies, no real-world data indicate that these [N95] masks decrease transmission in school settings—data that matter greatly, as these masks require a very tight fit to function effectively, and that may not be possible for many kids.”
  • “Over the past 21 months, slowly and with much resistance, the layers of mythology around Covid-19 mitigation in schools have been peeled away, each time without producing the much-ballyhooed increases in Covid-19. Schools did not become hot spots when they reopened, nor when they reduced physical distancing, nor when they eliminated deep-cleaning protocols. These layers were peeled away because the evidence supporting them was weak, and they all had substantial downsides for children’s education and health.”
  • “Covid-19 hospitalizations have “remained extremely low among children, on par with pediatric flu hospitalizations during a typical season.”
  • “Imposing on millions of children an intervention that provides little discernible benefit, on the grounds that we have not yet gathered solid evidence of its negative effects, violates the most basic tenet of medicine: First, do no harm.”

In an article published on Christmas Eve, CNN Medical Analyst Dr. Leana Wen confessed that “cloth masks are little more than facial decorations” and “this is what scientists and public health officials have been saying for months, many months, in fact.” Yet, she fails to tell the entire truth and instructs people to wear N95 masks without conveying their harms or the fact that gold standard studies have only found inconsistent benefits from N95s in healthcare settings, much less community settings.

Fox News has published an article about how YouTube suspended Rand Paul for questioning the effectiveness of cloth masks and that the CDC is edging closer to Paul’s view. The article then links to Just Facts’ research on masks to document the fact that “several studies have shown” cloth masks “are not effective in stopping the spread of viruses like the coronavirus.”

Still leading people astray

Some of the most powerful proponents of masking continue to spread destructive fictions and withhold genuine facts from people. For a prime example, Google-owned YouTube recently censored a video from Just Facts about the dangers of N95 masks. Even though every fact in the video is documented with data from peer-reviewed science journals, OSHA, and the CDC—YouTube purged it with callous disregard for the health of people, especially children.

Likewise, the New York Times recently reported that Google-owned YouTube suspended conservative talk show host Dan Bongino “after he posted a video saying cloth and surgical masks were useless in stopping the spread of Covid—a false claim that violated the company’s misinformation policy.”

In reality, those “misinformation” policies and other pronouncements of tech giantsgovernment officialsmedia outlets, and fact checkers often flout basic principles of academic integrity, spread deadly falsehoods, and suppress facts that could help people.

The cracks that are opening in the dogma that “masks work” are just the tip of that iceberg.

COLUMN BY

James D. Agresti

James D. Agresti is the president and cofounder of Just Facts, a think tank dedicated to publishing rigorously documented facts about public policy issues. More by James D. Agresti

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Joe Rogan affair is not about ‘misinformation’ but narrative control

Only time will tell if Rogan’s critics have the last laugh and see him gone completely.


Comedian Joe Rogan is the biggest name in podcasting. His show, the Joe Rogan Experience, attracts an estimated 11 million listeners per episode. Since 2020, Spotify has enjoyed an exclusive deal with JRE for an estimated US$100 million. With three to four episodes per week, each of which run for hours at a time, he has a lot of influence — and a lot to lose.

And don’t his detractors know it!

“I want you to let Spotify know immediately TODAY that I want all my music off their platform,” Neil Young wrote to his management team and record label last week. “They can have Rogan or Young. Not both.” Spotify sided with Rogan — and then removed Young’s catalogue from their service.

Young’s decision followed the release of an open letter, penned by a 270-strong “coalition of scientists, medical professionals, professors, and science communicators,” who called Rogan out for “misinformation” and “promoting baseless conspiracy theories”. They were particularly referring to his recent interviews with Drs Robert Malone and Peter McCullough.

(As it turns out, fewer than 100 of the signees were medical doctors, most of whom work at universities and do not practice medicine. The remainder included teachers, psychologists, engineers, podcasters, a dentist, and a vet.)

Others have since followed the lead of Rogan’s frontrunner critics. Singer-songwriter Joni Mitchell soon announced she would remove her music from Spotify, followed by guitarist Nils Lofgren.

According to the Los Angeles Times, there are rumours that the Foo Fighters, Barry Manilow, and Prince Harry and Meghan Markle “will be the next to walk”. Indeed, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released a statement denouncing a “global misinformation crisis” and telling of their heroic efforts to hold Spotify accountable.

More recently, even the White House has urged Spotify to tighten the screws of censorship, first amendment be damned.

While Joe Rogan is a giant, he is certainly not uncancellable. And Spotify is no charitable organisation. Shareholders and company executives factor profits into any major decision — which may be why Spotify has already quietly cancelled over 40 past JRE episodes. They have also announced their decision to add a content advisory label to any podcasts that discuss Covid-19.

It may not end there. Only time will tell if Rogan’s critics have the last laugh and see him gone completely.

Just what is so threatening about this former UFC commentator and psychedelics enthusiast?

Decorated journalist Glenn Greenwald — whose centre-left libertarian outlook closely aligns with Rogan’s — minces no words on the controversy:

Censorship — once the province of the American Right during the heyday of the Moral Majority of the 1980s — now occurs in isolated instances in that faction. In modern-day American liberalism, however, censorship is a virtual religion. They simply cannot abide the idea that anyone who thinks differently or sees the world differently than they should be heard.

Warns Greenwald: the woke’s focus until recently was to “expand and distort the concept of ‘hate speech’ to mean ‘views that make us uncomfortable,’ and then demand that such ‘hateful’ views be prohibited on that basis.” Now, he says, their target is “misinformation” or “disinformation” — terms that “have no clear or concise meaning”. And the lack of definition is deliberate. “Like the term ‘terrorism,’ it is their elasticity that makes them so useful,” he writes.

To prove the point, Greenwald provides a laundry list of clear-as-day misinformation that outlets like CNN, NBC, The New York Times and The Atlantic have disseminated through the Trump era. He cites the Russiagate hoax, the bounties on the heads of US soldiers in Afghanistan hoax, and the Hunter Biden emails are Russian disinformation hoax, among many.

“Corporate outlets beloved by liberals are free to spout serious falsehoods without being deemed guilty of disinformation,” Greenwald notes, “and, because of that, do so routinely.”

It’s not Rogan’s alleged “misinformation” that worries these outlets. It’s their loss of control over the narrative being believed by the masses. They too have much to lose — and they are losing. Rogan’s stats dwarf the viewership of America’s popular cable news channels, even in primetime.

For further proof that “misinformation” is not Joe Rogan’s crime, consider that Neil Young previously released an entire album, The Monsanto Years (2015), which sowed major popular distrust towards genetically modified cropping.

Young released a short anti-GMO documentary, and he went on tour “amplifying misinformation about GMOs to large mainstream audiences”. He was also interviewed by Steven Colbert on The Late Show, where he warned of “the terrible diseases and all of the things that are happening” to people who eat genetically modified products.

To Joe Rogan’s credit, he released a nine-minute video via Spotify in which he graciously addresses his critics, admits various failings, and clarifies that he is no expert but enjoys hearing from experts across the ideological divide. His message would disarm all but the most dedicated censorship enthusiasts.

In the video, Rogan addresses the hot potato that is ‘misinformation’, and makes a good case for why his show deserves to stay up:

The problem I have with the term ‘misinformation’ — especially today — is that many of the things that we thought of as misinformation just a short while ago are now accepted as fact.

“Like for instance, eight months ago if you said, ‘If you get vaccinated you can still catch covid and you can still spread covid,’ you would be removed from social media. They would ban you from certain platforms. Now, that’s accepted as fact.

“If you said, ‘I don’t think cloth masks work,’ you would be banned from social media. Now that’s openly and repeatedly stated on CNN.

“If you said, ‘I think it’s possible that Covid-19 came from a lab,’ you would be banned from many social media platforms. Now that’s on the cover of Newsweek.”

Precisely. “Misinformation” is whatever the cultural imperialists decide it is at any given moment, until they change their mind or the truth catches up with them.

Rather than censoring him, Rogan’s critics would do well to listen to his podcast. By doing so, they may even learn what their future opinions will be.

COLUMN BY

Kurt Mahlburg

Kurt Mahlburg is a writer and author, and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He has a passion for both the philosophical and the personal, drawing on his background as a graduate… More by Kurt Mahlburg

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.