Dr. David Martin is the founder and owner of the company M-CAM International which has provided research and corporate advisory services to over 160 countries and he has personally served as an advisor to the World Bank and many governments. Dr Martin first came to the attention of the world when he featured in the August 2020 documentary by Mikki Willis called Planandemic Indoctornation.
EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with videos posted byEeyore is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Vlad Tepes Bloghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngVlad Tepes Blog2024-03-17 06:59:322024-03-17 07:07:16VIDEOS: ‘The Great Setup’ Parts 1 & 2 with Dr. David Martin
A group of scientists tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) are now using taxpayer cash to import bats and perform Ebola experiments in the U.S., the Daily Caller has learned.
According to a Daily Mail report, a new lab, funded by U.S. taxpayers, is being built in Colorado that will import bats from around the world to experiment on dangerous diseases. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) granted Colorado State University (CSU) $6.7 million to build a new bat lab in partnership with EcoHealth Alliance (EHA). This is despite House and Senate Republicans calling on the NIH to terminate federal funding to EcoHealth, which has for years funneled taxpayer money to the WIV.
The Caller has also learned that in late September 2023, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) gave CSU and EHA another $1.7M towards the establishment of the CSU breeding facility and construction of the bat lab.
Greg Ebel, a CSU virologist and project leader for the bat research facility said in July: “This isn’t a bat COVID lab. It’s not a bioweapons lab. We’re not working with Ebola or Nipah virus or any of these things. I’m not interested in losing my job or going to jail or interested in doing research that’s going to carry home pathogens to my wife or my child. Those kinds of things are beyond ridiculous.”
However, the project description for the September 2023 NIH grant for the CSU/EHA bat lab states the bat lab would be used specifically to study those pathogens. The grant was uncovered by White Coat Waste Project (WCW), a taxpayer watchdog organization, and shared first with the Daily Caller.
“We will capture horseshoe bats and Indian flying foxes, respective reservoir hosts of Nipah virus and SARS-related coronaviruses, in Bangladesh where they will be quarantined and provided veterinary care as they adapt to captivity. Bats will be shipped to CSU to establish the breeding colonies as a resource for investigators who study these viruses… Finally, we will perform experimental infection studies of Nipah virus, SARS-CoV-2 and the SARS-related coronavirus, RaTG13,” the description states.
Another document obtained by WCW from a 2022 CSU Board of Governors meeting shows that CSU will be doing Ebola experiments on these bats in conjunction with NIAID’s Rocky Mountain Lab.
The new project has lawmakers who have called to prohibit federal funding to EHA concerned.
“The world just lived through a once-in-a-century pandemic, likely caused by a lab leak involving risky research on bat coronaviruses, funded in part by NIH. Instead of pausing to reflect on this, NIH continues sponsoring similar experiments on bat coronaviruses—with some of the same mad scientists who collaborated with China’s Wuhan Institute — right here in America! You would have to be blind as a bat to think this is a good idea. NIH needs to take a timeout from funding these batty studies before history repeats itself,” Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst told the Caller.
In 2022, Ernst introduced legislation that would prohibit federal funding to EcoHealth Alliance. The bill stipulates that “[n]o funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law may be made available for any purpose to EcoHealth Alliance, Inc, including any subsidiaries and related organizations that are directly controlled by EcoHealth Alliance, Inc.”
“Experts agree that COVID was caused by Dr. Fauci’s bat coronavirus experiments in Wuhan and we can’t let the NIH ramp up this risky and unnecessary animal research on our shores. I’m leading efforts to make sure Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars aren’t flowing to EcoHealth Alliance and gain-of-function research that can lead to a pandemic or be exploited for a bioterrorist attack,” Florida Republican Rep. Greg Steube told the Caller.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, who served as a director of NIAID, has repeatedly testified to Congress that the U.S. government has not funded gain-of-function research at the WIV, from which proponents of the lab-leak theory believe COVID-19 escaped. The WIV received U.S. taxpayer dollars via a NIAID sub-grant to EcoHealth Alliance.
“After what we exposed in Wuhan, giving the disgraced EcoHealth Alliance and its cronies millions more of our tax money to traffic infected wild bats from Asia to US animal labs for dangerous virus experiments is a recipe for disaster. We first uncovered how EcoHealth and Fauci shipped tax dollars to the Wuhan lab for reckless bat virus-hunting and gain-of-function experiments that violated federal policy and that the FBI and others believe caused COVID. Now, we’ve documented how boneheaded bureaucrats at the NIH, Pentagon and other federal agencies are bankrolling another EcoHealth bat lab that risks prompting a pandemic right here at home,” Justin Goodman, Senior Vice President of the White Coat Waste Project told the Caller.
“We’re working with Congress right now to curtail wasteful government spending on virus-hunting and animal experiments by EcoHealth and others that can cause lab leaks and create bioweapons. The solution is simple. Stop the money. Stop the madness,” Goodman added.
The Caller contacted NIH and NIAID about the lab and plans for experiments to which they did not immediately respond.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2023-11-17 06:28:132023-11-17 06:32:01Scientist Tied To Wuhan Lab Now Using Taxpayer Cash To Do Bat Ebola Experiments In America, Watchdog Finds
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) gave six analysts financial rewards for changing their position on the lab leak coronavirus origin theory, according to whistleblower testimony released by House investigators.
The House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic wrote letters Tuesday to CIA Director William Burns and former CIA Chief Operating Officer Andrew Makridis outlining whistleblower testimony accusing the CIA of giving monetary incentives to six agents on its Covid Discovery Team to change their position on the lab leak hypothesis. According to the lawmakers, the whistleblower is a “multi-decade, senior-level, current Agency officer.”
🚨BREAKING🚨
New testimony from a highly credible whistleblower alleges @CIA rewarded six analysts with significant financial incentives to change their COVID-19 origins conclusion from a lab-leak to zoonosis. pic.twitter.com/KIemfi2Wgl
— Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic (@COVIDSelect) September 12, 2023
“According to the whistleblower, the Agency assigned seven officers to a COVID Discovery Team (Team). The Team consisted of multi-disciplinary and experienced officers with significant scientific expertise. According to the whistleblower, at the end of its review, six of the seven members of the Team believed the intelligence and science were sufficient to make a low confidence assessment that COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China,” the letter to Burns reads.
“The whistleblower further contends that to come to the eventual public determination of uncertainty, the other six members were given a significant monetary incentive to change their position,” the letter adds.
House investigators are requesting Burns turn over all documents and communications related to the Covid Team and the origins of the coronavirus, including its correspondence with relevant federal agencies and the team’s pay history. Burns has until Sept. 26, 2023 to respond to the subcommittee’s request. Likewise, the subcommittee is asking Makridis to participate in a transcribed interview on Sept. 26 because of the “central role” he played in forming the Covid Team.
The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic published a report in July accusing former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci of orchestrating a campaign to discredit the lab leak theory at the beginning of the covid pandemic. Assessments from the FBI and Department of Energy have concluded covid most likely originated from a lab in Wuhan, China where coronaviruses were being researched.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2023-09-12 14:30:332023-09-12 14:30:33CIA Gave Financial Rewards To Six Analysts Who Covered Up Lab Leak Investigation, Whistleblower Alleges
CDC V-safe data show 7-8% of Americans get so sick they have to go to the hospital. And still these Democrat villains are mandating the vaccine. It’s war-fare.
By Sandy Fitzgerald | Newsmax, 21 January 2023 11:22 AM EST
Twitter CEO Elon Musk, a frequent critic of Dr. Anthony Fauci and COVID-related mandates, says he felt like he “was dying” after he got his second COVID booster vaccine, and that a cousin of his suffered myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart, after getting his shot.
And my cousin, who is young & in peak health, had a serious case of myocarditis. Had to go to the hospital.
“I had major side effects from my second booster shot,” Musk said in a tweet Friday. “Felt like I was dying for several days. Hopefully, no permanent damage, but I dunno.”
In a subsequent message, Musk said that his cousin “who is young & in peak health, had a serious case of myocarditis. Had to go to the hospital.”
The second booster shot, he explained in another tweet, wasn’t his choice but a requirement to visit one of his Tesla locations in Berlin, Germany.
Musk also said that he had contracted COVID-19 before the vaccines came out and “it was basically a mild cold,” and then he had the Johnson & Johnson vaccine with “no bad effects, except my arm hurt briefly.”
He added that his first mRNA booster “was ok, but the second one crushed me.”
His posts came after a Rasmussen Reports tweet saying that about 12 million people may have had “major side effects” after getting the COVID vaccines.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there have been “rare cases” of myocarditis or pericarditis” that have occurred, most often among adolescent and young adult males ages 16 and older within a week of getting a second dose of an mRNA COVID-19 Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine. However, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine has not had similar reports.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2023-01-23 06:45:162023-01-23 06:48:25Elon Musk: ‘Felt Like I Was Dying’ After COVID Vaccine
Those who seek to streamline online discourse, according to “official standards”, end up impoverishing public debate.
Over the course of the past decade, numerous regulatory authorities, both public and private, have increasingly positioned themselves as guardians of the integrity of our public sphere, standing watch over the content of information, and flagging or suppressing information deemed to be harmful, misleading, or offensive.
The zeal with which these gatekeepers defend their power over the public sphere became evident when billionaire Elon Musk promised to undo Twitter’s policy of censoring anything that contradicted leftist ideology or questioned the safety of Covid vaccines. There was an uproar, a wringing of hands, and lamentations, as “experts worried” that Twitter would collapse into a den of “far right” extremists and misinformers.
Sound and fury
Threats by the EU Commission to fine Twitter or even completely ban the app in Europe, if it did not enforce EU regulations on hate speech and misinformation, show that the hand-wringing over Twitter’s potential embrace of free speech is much more than empty rhetoric: the European Commission has declared its intention to force Twitter to revert to its old censorship policies if it does not play ball. According to Euronews,
The European Commission has warned Elon Musk that Twitter must do much more to protect users from hate speech, misinformation and other harmful content, or risk a fine and even a ban under strict new EU content moderation rules.
Thierry Breton, the EU’s commissioner for digital policy, told the billionaire Tesla CEO that the social media platform will have to significantly increase efforts to comply with the new rules, known as the Digital Services Act, set to take effect next year.
Censorship has recently occurred principally on two fronts: Covid “misinformation” and “hate speech.” Some forms of censorship are applied by agencies of the State, such as courts and police officers; others by private companies, such as Twitter, LinkedIn and Google-YouTube. The net effect is the same in both cases: an increasingly controlled and filtered public sphere, and a shrinking of liberty of discussion around a range of topics deemed too sensitive or “dangerous” to be discussed openly and freely.
Censorship, whether public or private, has proliferated in recent years:
First, there was Canada’s bizarre claim that people had an enforceable human right to be referred to by their preferred pronouns
Next, UK police were investigating citizens for using language the police deemed “offensive”
Then, we saw Big Tech giants, in particular Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, censoring perspectives that dissented from their version of scientific and moral orthodoxy on issues such as transgender rights, vaccine safety, effective Covid treatment protocols, and the origins of SARS-CoV-2.
Now, advocates of censorship have argued that it is all to the good that vile, hateful and discriminatory opinions, as well as every conceivable form of medical and scientific “misinformation,” are shut out of our public sphere. After all, this makes the public sphere a “safe” place for citizens to exchange information and opinions. On this view, we need to purge the public sphere of voices that are toxic, hateful, harmful, and “misleading” on issues like electoral politics, public health policies, and minority rights.
Thin ice
While there is a strong case to be made for censorship of certain forms of manifestly dangerous speech, such as exhortations to suicide or direct incitement to violence, the hand of the censor must be firmly tied behind his back, so that he cannot easily decide for everyone else what is true or false, just or unjust, “accurate” or “misleading”, innocent or offensive.
For once you hand broad, discretionary powers to someone to decide which sorts of speech are offensive, erroneous, misleading, or hate-inducing, they will start to purge the public sphere of views they happen to find ideologically, philosophically, or theologically disagreeable. And there is certainly no reason to assume that their judgement calls on what counts as true or false, innocent or toxic speech will be correct.
The fundamental mistake behind the argument for aggressive censorship policies is the notion that there is a set of Truths out there on contested political and scientific questions that are crystal clear or can be validated by the “right experts”; and that anyone who contradicts these a priori Truths must be either malicious or ignorant. If this were true, the point of public discussion would just be to clarify and unpack what the “experts” agree are the Truths of science and morality.
But there is no such set of pristine Truths that can be validated by human beings independently of a free and open discussion, especially on difficult and complex matters such as infection control, justice, climate change, and economic policy. Rather, the truth must be discovered gradually, through the vibrant back-and-forth of dialogue, debate, refutation, and counter-refutation. In short, public deliberation is fundamentally a discovery process. The truth is not known in advance, but uncovered gradually, as an array of evidence is examined and put to the test, and as rival views clash and hold each other accountable.
If we empower a censor to quash opinions that are deemed by powerful actors to be offensive, false, or misleading, we are effectively short-circuiting that discovery process. When we put our faith in a censor to keep us on the straight and narrow, we are assuming that the censor can stand above the stream of conflicting arguments, and from a position of epistemic and/or moral superiority, pick out the winning positions in advance.
We are assuming that some people are so smart, or wise, or virtuous, that they do not actually need to get their hands dirty and participate in a messy argument with their adversaries, or get their views challenged in public. We are assuming that some people are more expert and well-informed than anyone else, including other recognised experts, and may therefore decide, for everyone else, which opinions are true and which are false, which are intrinsically offensive and which are “civil,” and which are “facts” and which are “fake news.”
Needless to say, this is an extraordinarly naïve and childish illusion, that no realistic grasp of human nature and cognition could possibly support. But it is a naive and childish illusion that has been enthusiastically embraced and propagated by Big Tech companies such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn in their rules of content moderation, and it is a view that is increasingly finding its way into the political discourse and legislative programmes of Western countries that were once champions of freedom of expression.
It is imperative that the advocates of heavy-handed censorship do not win the day, because if they do, then the public sphere will become a hall of mirrors, in which the lazy, self-serving mantras of a few powerful actors bounce, virtually unchallenged, from one platform to another, while dissenting voices are consigned to the shadows and dismissed as the rantings of crazy people.
In a heavily censored public sphere, scientifically weak and morally vacuous views of the world will gain public legitimacy, not because they have earned people’s trust in an open and honest exchange of arguments, but because they have been imposed by the arbitrary will of a few powerful actors.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-12-14 04:41:132022-12-14 05:13:05Political and Scientific Censorship Short-circuits the Quest for Truth
The White House press corps exploded Tuesday after press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre berated the Daily Caller’s White House correspondent Diana Glebova.
Dr. Anthony Fauci was partaking in a press briefing when he went to step away from the podium. Glebova said she had asked several times what Fauci had done to investigate the origins of the virus, prompting Jean-Pierre to step back to the podium and snap at Glebova.
“Hold on one second, we have a process here. I’m not calling on people who yell. You’re being disrespectful to your colleagues and you’re being disrespectful to our guest. I will not call on you if you yell, and also you’re taking time off the clock,” she said.
The Grio reporter April Ryan also told her she was “being disrespectful.”
Glebova tried to respond but Jean-Pierre immediately silenced her, saying she would not get into a “back and forth with you.”
Glebova then said to Jean-Pierre that she “calls on the same people all the time.”
As Jean-Pierre then tried to step away, the New York Post’s Steven Nelson tried to defend Glebova, as did Simon Ateba from Africa News Today.
“She’s asking a good question, she’s asking a very good question,” Ateba said.
“You need to call on people across the room, she has a valid question, she’s asking about the origins of COVID,” Ateba said, prompting Jean-Pierre to head back to the podium and nastily say she heard the question but would not respond.
Daily Caller's @DianaGlebova tries to ask Dr. Fauci about what he did to investigate the origins of covid and Jean-Pierre shuts her down.
The New York State Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that New York City cannot fire employees for not getting vaccinated against COVID-19, dealing a blow to Democratic Mayor Eric Adams’ pandemic policy.
The court ordered the city to reinstate all fired employees and grant them backpay, citing the fact that being vaccinated against COVID-19 does not stop an individual from catching or spreading the virus, and thus being vaccinated does not grant enough community-wide benefit to warrant a mandate. The health commissioner “acted beyond his authority” by issuing an indefinite vaccine mandate rather than a temporary one, according to the court.
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 NY State Supreme Court reinstates all fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay, says the state violated rights, acted arbitrary & capricious, notes:“Being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting Covid-19.”https://t.co/nvOsWfa56Spic.twitter.com/WhH4wje2bQ
Adams said earlier this year his administration would not bring back workers who had been fired due to being unvaccinated. Roughly 1,400 workers were ultimately let go, including a number of firefighters and police officers. Adams came under fire for not allowing an exception to the mandate for those workers after he granted one to celebrities who were competing in sports or putting on performances in the city.
“States of emergency are meant to be temporary,” the court said in its ruling. “The question presented is whether the health commissioner has the authority to enact a permanent condition of employment during a state of emergency.”
The court ultimately found that the commissioner did not have that right.
Many COVID-19 vaccine mandates were put in place based on the rationale that the vaccines could drastically reduce the chances of a person becoming infected or transmitting the virus if they were infected, so getting vaccinated was not only a benefit to the individual getting the shots, but everyone around them.
However, as more data emerged to indicate that the vaccines are only marginally effective at stopping spread, particularly against newer variants of the virus, that rationale became less convincing. The New York Supreme Court pointed this out in its decision, saying “being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting COVID-19… the Petitioners should not have been terminated for choosing not to protect themselves.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-10-25 13:51:502022-10-25 13:55:08Court Orders New York City To Reinstate Unvaccinated Employees, Give Backpay
A federal judge struck down the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) mask mandate for public transportation Monday.
District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle of Florida’s middle district ruled that the mask mandate exceeds the CDC’s statutory authority under the Administrative Procedure Act, according to court documents. The lawsuit challenging the mandate was initially brought in July 2021 by the Health Freedom Defense Fund.
*MASK MANDATE FOR PLANES, TRAINS OVERTURNED BY FLORIDA JUDGE
Mizelle, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, ruled that the CDC’s order “violates the procedures required for agency rulemaking under the APA” and remanded the mandate order back to the CDC.
The judge who just overturned the mask mandate on airplanes is Kathryn Kimball Mizelle. 35-years-old, former Clarence Thomas clerked, appointed by Trump and confirmed by the Senate right before the lame duck session ended in 2020. pic.twitter.com/lu6ck1FIvT
The Biden administration has continued to extend the temporary mask mandate order throughout the pandemic, most recently announcing last week that the order would be extended at least 15 more days into May. With all 50 states and most localities having dropped their indoor mask mandates earlier this year, the federal mandate forcing Americans to mask on planes, trains and other public transit is one of the last remaining COVID-19 restrictions still in place.
Earlier this year, 21 states sued the Biden administration in an attempt to end the mandate. Biden’s CDC has come under further scrutiny for continuing to apply the public transportation mask mandate, citing the threat of the BA.2 Omicron subvariant of the coronavirus, while ending Title 42 and relaxing immigration enforcement, citing the reduced impact of the pandemic at this time.
“Ladies and gentlemen, this is your pilot speaking. This is the most important announcement I’ve ever made. The federal mask mandate is over. Take off your mask if you choose!”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-04-18 14:35:132022-04-19 10:22:00Federal Mask Mandate For Public Transportation Overturned By District Judge
With nearly 900,000 deaths in the United States, the virus’ origin remains inconclusive.
In a CSP/TIPP Poll taken this month, 1,355 U.S. adults were asked, “From what you have seen or heard, the coronavirus MOST LIKELY…” The responses were:
Was developed in a lab (47%)
Came from animals (18%)
Came about naturally (10%)
Came from human living habits (7%)
Not sure (17%)
When the COVID-19 virus emerged in Wuhan, China, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) pointed the finger in all directions to avoid responsibility for the fallout. They have variously blamed the U.S. bio-military facilities at Ft. Detrick, supposedly infectious U.S. military personnel at the 2019 Military World Games in Wuhan, and have even accused Italy of being the birthplace of the virus. However, they generally support the findings of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) joint report that said “the virus jumping from bats to humans via an intermediate animal was the most probable scenario, while a leak from Wuhan’s virology labs was ‘extremely unlikely.’”
Western medical bureaucrats were apparently desperate to quash any talk of a lab leak as well, according to a Brownstone Institute review of a recent book on the early weeks of the virus by the “UK’s Fauci” Jeremy Farrar. Dr. Anthony Fauci himself, of the National Institute of Allergies and Infection Diseases (NIAID) took a hard line against the “lab leak” hypothesis from the beginning. In May 2020 he said he was “very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated” saying all signs indicated the virus “evolved in nature and then jumped species.” A year later in May 2021, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) confronted Fauci about the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) funding of gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through a cutout called EcoHealth Alliance, uncovering a possible motive to downplay any non-natural introduction of the virus to humans. Also in May, Facebook changed the policy under which it had banned users and removed posts for asserting that “COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured.” By June 3, 2021, Fauci finally admitted “it could have been a lab leak,” although he said animal-to-human transmission was most likely. The lab hypothesis reached a pop culture tipping point the same month when beloved comedian and former Daily Show host John Stewart openly advocated for it on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert.
Conservatives (69%) were much more likely than moderates (47%) and liberals (28%) to believe the virus emerged from a lab. Strikingly, nearly one-third (30%) of liberals still believe that the virus came from animals. This seems to reflect a residue from the initial line from Anthony Fauci and the health and media establishment that the virus emerged from a bat or pangolin in a so-called “wet market.” Liberals may be more likely to believe “The Science” as first presented, even if the official line of Fauci and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has “evolved” over time. This may portend political trouble for governors and local government executives who are increasingly rolling back COVID restrictions like vaccination passports and masks, while their constituents have been scared into hiding by constant media reports that inflate the prevalence and severity of COVID infections.
The lab-leak theory became mainstream 9-10 months ago. If liberal attitudes on masks and vaccines lag by a similar amount of time, Democrat politicians may be in an impossible balancing act between their constituents on the left and the rest of the country which strongly disapproves of President Biden’s COVID strategies as the November 2022 midterm elections loom.
The 47% of Americans who believed the coronavirus was developed in a lab were asked whether they thought it was released intentionally or accidentally:
It is striking that nearly two-thirds (61%) of those who believed in a lab leak also believed that it was intentional. That means that 29% of all those polled believed that the virus originated in a lab and that the CCP purposely released it. Plenty of evidence exists that China “weaponized” the spread of the virus after it left the lab. For example, while CCP locked down domestic air travel after the outbreak was detected, they encouraged international flights out of Wuhan which quickly infected cities around the world, making containment impossible. However, there is no proof that the initial passage of the virus from the Wuhan lab to the outside world was a conscious military strategy by the CCP.
Conservatives (66%) were most likely to suspect an intentional lab release with moderates (55%) and liberals (54%) about the same.
Women (65%) were significantly more likely than men (53%) to believe the intentional hypothesis.
Both blacks (66%) and Hispanics (72%) were more likely than average (61%) to think the coronavirus was leaked as an intentional act.
These Americans may perceive nefarious intent through circumstantial evidence alone. The monthly TIPP China Favorability index shows a steady decline from 35.9 in August 2021 to 27.0 in February 2022, which marks the lowest rating in 12 months and the first time the index has dipped below 30. It is natural to distrust a formidable rival on the world stage. The CCP leadership clearly wishes us ill and the American public expects them to act accordingly.
A secondary reason for attribution of malice may lie in human emotion and psychology. COVID-19 has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and sickened millions more. It has also destroyed entire sectors of our economy, especially small businesses, and vaccine and mask mandates have disrupted daily life in unprecedented ways. Americans are discouraged, angry and depressed, and they need an outlet. It’s difficult to blame a virus as such, it is too nebulous. The human mind “wants” a sentient force to be responsible for so much pain and destruction.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Center For Security Policyhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCenter For Security Policy2022-02-18 13:32:012022-02-18 13:37:26CSP/TIPP POLL: Nearly Half Say Coronavirus is Man-Made and 29% Say it was Intentionally Released
David Leonhardt, a writer for The New York Times (NYT), questioned some of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) guidance in a Friday article amid a rollback of several coronavirus restrictions across the country.
Leonhardt opens his piece by noting how the CDC warns against medium-rare hamburgers because they were “undercooked” and therefore could pose a threat. He also notes how eating raw cookie dough is ill-advised among, other apparently common things.
“If you happen to be somebody who engages in any of these risky activities, I have some bad news for you this morning: You apparently do not believe in following the science,” Leonhardt wrote.
Leonhardt said the “instinct” to follow the science “is both understandable and profoundly decent” especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, “but it has led to a widespread misunderstanding.”
“Many people have come to believe that expert opinion is a unitary, omniscient force. That’s the assumption behind the phrases ‘follow the science’ and ‘what the science says.’ It imagines science almost as a god -Science- who could solve our dilemmas if we only listened.”
Leonhardt said individuals are forced to make trade-offs about science, pointing to COVID-19 restrictions as an example.
“Covid restrictions – mask mandates, extended quarantines, restrictions on gatherings, school closure during outbreaks – can both slow the virus’s spread and have harmful side effects. These restrictions can reduce serious Covid illness and death among the immunocompromised, elderly and unvaccinated. They can also lead to mental-health problems, lost learning for children, child-care hardships for lower-income families, and isolation and frustration that have fueled suicides, drug overdoses and violent crime.”
Leonhardt noted how the CDC sometimes can “miss the big picture,” pointing to the CDC’s reluctance to urge mask use and slowness “to admit that outdoor masking has little benefit.”
“As you think about your own Covid views, I encourage you to remember that C.D.C. officials and other scientists cannot make these dilemmas go away,” Leonhardt wrote. “They can provide deep expertise and vital perspective. They are also fallible and have their own biases.”
Democratic-led states, like New Jersey, New York, Delaware, and Connecticut, lifted their mask requirements recently, but President Joe Biden voiced disagreement with the decisions.
“It’s hard to say whether they’re wrong, here’s the science saying now that masks work, masks make a difference,” Biden said. “And there’s a relationship, I think there’s only one governor drawing back immediately and most of them are somewhere in the end of February, March, April. They’re set[ting] a time limit and I assume it has something to do with whether the Omicron variant continues to dive in fewer and fewer cases.”
“I committed that I would follow the science,” Biden continued. “And the science as put forward by the CDC and the federal people and I think it’s probably premature but it’s a tough call.”
The CDC recommends individuals wear a mask indoors regardless of their vaccination status.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-02-12 07:56:512022-02-12 07:58:50‘We Can’t Expect Them To Tell Us How To Live’: NYT Writer Questions ‘Follow The Science’ Guidance
Natural immunity from prior infection granted stronger levels of protection against the Delta variant of COVID-19 than vaccination alone, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said in a study released Wednesday.
Before Delta became dominant, individuals who had natural immunity were experiencing higher case rates than individuals who were only vaccinated, the study found, but after Delta took hold, those with natural immunity caught COVID-19 less frequently than those who were only vaccinated.
The study examined four categories of people — unvaccinated and vaccinated who survived a previous COVID-19 infection, and unvaccinated and vaccinated who had never been infected — in California and New York between May and November 2021. The highest case rates were among those who had neither been vaccinated or previously infected. The most protection against infection and hospitalization was in those who had both been vaccinated and survived an earlier bout with the virus.
The agency cautioned that the data in question only measured results against the Delta variant and that Omicron may present new challenges that alter the calculus of natural immunity versus vaccination.
Biden administration officials and some public health experts have repeatedly downplayed the effectiveness of natural immunity against COVID-19, but this study is only the latest to indicate that recovery from prior infection can at least rival, if not surpass, that offered from vaccination alone. Most research has shown that for maximum protection against reinfection or severe illness, those who were previously infected should still get vaccinated.
The First Amendment is a beautiful thing. It allows even former Soviet Agitprop artists to show off their wares on the walls of Washington, D.C.
Agitprop refers to an intentional, vigorous promulgation of ideas. The term originated in Soviet Russia where it referred to popular media, such as literature, plays, pamphlets, films, and other art forms, with an explicitly political message in favor of communism.
This is fitting since Joe’s middle name is Beijing.
Somebody put up this incredible street art in DC over night.
Knowing DC it’ll be ripped down within hours. All must comply!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-01-16 13:07:242022-01-16 13:13:59Soviet Era Inspired Agitprop Shows up in Washington, D.C.
In early September, an annoyed and impatient President Biden gave a speech on the state of COVID-19 in which he said Americans were testing his patience by not lining up to receive their COVID-19 vaccine. That day, he announced a vaccine mandate on our military, federal employees, federal contractors, all health care workers and everyone who works in a company with 100 or more employees — in other words, most Americans.
People watched in disbelief and wondered, the president can’t just give a speech and tell the whole country what to do, right? Mandates are only in Socialist Europe or Communist China, not here, right? The president can’t just fire people from their careers, force them out of their employer-provided health insurance and put their family into chaos just because he has “lost patience” with them, right?”
The simple answer is no. The president doesn’t run every family and every company in America, and we are standing up to stop him.
Nationwide, over 75% of Americans five years or older have already had the vaccine. The CDC estimates that 92% of Americans 16 years or older have already developed antibodies against COVID-19, from vaccination or from previous infection. Even with that statistic, the president still wants to fire people who do not “fall in line” from their jobs.
We’ve heard from thousands of people in our states who don’t want to take the COVID-19 vaccine for a number of reasons. Millions of people have already recovered from COVID and may have some level of natural immunity. Others have an objection to the vaccine based on their sincerely held religious beliefs. Some are being treated for cancers or auto-immune diseases and don’t want to introduce a relatively new vaccine into that treatment. Some have serious adverse reactions to many vaccines. Some have heard about the possible side effects of the vaccine or long-term possible issues and are just wary of taking it right away. Millions of other Americans just don’t like being told what to do. We are a stubborn, self-reliant people; that is part of what has made us the greatest nation in the world.
Our service members also face a serious decision and serious consequences. According to the latest numbers, only about 45.5% of the National Guard and Reserves are vaccinated, and we’ve heard from highly trained specialists with long careers who are considering remaining unvaccinated, even if they are fired. Imagine losing that knowledge and investment into our military. Firing our National Guard members will absolutely affect military readiness and disaster response in every state.
One of the scarier “or else” components to this is that if companies don’t give in to the vaccine mandate, guess what? The Democrats’ new multi-trillion-dollar bill increases OSHA fines for companies that employ 100 or more people tenfold. Democrats are not only trying to fire workers for not getting the vaccine, they’re also trying to shut down companies if they don’t fire their workers.
President Biden is playing a dangerous game of chicken with our families and our economy. He is gambling that he can put enough pressure on people that they’ll cave to his will by taking away their jobs and closing down companies with large fines. Americans are gambling that Biden will blink before they leave their jobs because if they change jobs in mass numbers it will cause even more economic damage and even more high inflation.
We call on our colleagues who believe in freedom from government intrusion into our lives to support our legislation to disapprove of the Department of Labor’s rule when we call it up for a vote in the Senate next week. All 50 Senate Republicans have committed to stopping Biden’s mandate on the private sector through what is called a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act. Now, with the addition of Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, we have the votes to overturn Biden’s mandate on private businesses in the Senate. Following the Senate vote, we will send it over to the House for a legislative “Judgement Day” on the mandate.
Meanwhile, lawsuits have been filed in nearly every part of the country challenging the vaccine mandate, with the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board noting how scathing the Fifth Circuit court was in its decision to halt implementation of the rule last month. The courts are finally joining with us to fight executive overreach.
If your Member of Congress is on the fence about the vaccine mandate, we encourage you to let them know where you stand. Many Americans who support the vaccine personally don’t support firing people from their jobs because they choose not to get the vaccine. Firing frontline workers who risked their lives to serve our nation before the vaccine is a terrible way to say thank you for their service.
Read the tea leaves, President Biden. America’s patience has run out with you trying to act like their dad and telling them what to do. Let Americans choose what is right for their health, their family and their freedom.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2021-12-06 05:36:142021-12-06 06:47:32SENS. LANKFORD and BRAUN: Biden Is Forcing American Families To Bend Until They Break
American consumers should expect to see higher prices and even some empty shelves during their holiday shopping this year, President Joe Biden’s White House told Reuters on Tuesday.
The warning comes as the Biden administration works frantically to push back on skyrocketing inflation and strained supply chains across the country. Economists predicted earlier this year that the final months of 2021 would see total consumer prices rising 3.2% over 2020.
“There will be things that people can’t get,” a senior White House official told Reuters on Tuesday. “At the same time, a lot of these goods are hopefully substitutable by other things. … I don’t think there’s any real reason to be panicked, but we all feel the frustration and there’s a certain need for patience to help get through a relatively short period of time.”
A Sept. 29 study from Salesforce predicted that retail prices could rise as much as 20% compared to 2020. Women’s clothing, jewelry and watches had already risen 11.9% and 12.9% respectively as of August.
“Barriers at ports and skyrocketing costs of containers, two major pressures shaping holidays, should cause consumers to be concerned about product availability,” Salesforce warned.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki and other administration officials have repeatedly insisted that the inflation is “transitory” and will normalize sometime in 2022. The White House has repeated the line numerous times since worries over the economy began to outpace COVID-19 in polls across the U.S.
“What is the White House’s message to average Americans, including those who are on limited income though who are experiencing higher prices right now for food and clothing and other goods and services? You mentioned it’s expected to die down next year, but what is your message to them in the meantime, is it simply just to wait it out?” a reporter asked Psaki during a press briefing in July.
“That’s certainly not what I’ve ever said,” Psaki responded. “Our message is that we understand the threat that inflation poses. We will be vigilant about any responses needed. It’s important for Americans to know and understand that these impacts are temporary, and some of these price increases are a result of the economy turning back on.”
Some experts have disagreed, however, arguing that the inflation is here to stay “for years” thanks to Biden’s unprecedented spending programs.
“The 100% cause of inflation is the government,” Peter Schiff, the chief economist and global strategist at Euro Pacific Capital, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “It’s when the government spends money that it doesn’t collect in taxes and then the Federal Reserve monetizes the resulting deficits by printing money.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2021-10-13 08:01:412021-10-14 11:06:44Biden White House Warns American Consumers Of Empty Shelves Come Christmastime
The text of the CARES Act states that it was implemented to “provide emergency assistance and health care response for individuals, families, and businesses affected by the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.”
As Jason Rantz documents, Washington illegally imposed a racial test on recipients. Federal aid should really be conditioned on non-discriminatory application.
…to qualify to the Washington Equity Relief Fund, a group of “reviewers” made sure the nonprofits were “led by and serving Black, Indigenous and people of color.”…
A group of over 100 peer reviewers discussed and scored applications before doling out funding, in collaboration with the Department of Commerce.
The reviewers were “prioritized” on the basis of their race. About 95% identified as a racial minority and 77% experienced poverty. Ironically, the Department of Commerce had the reviewers, who were excluding nonprofits run by white people due to perceived privilege, go through compulsory “anti-bias” training.
Consider all of this to essentially be funding for Democrat organizers and campaign operations at taxpayer expense. That’s the case with much of the “community” non-profit sector that’s funded by city, state and federal funds.
But it gets worse.
Collective Justice, part of the Public Defenders Association, is a partisan, social justice group. It actively lobbies light-on-crime policies and is now being propped up by federal tax dollars.
The nonprofit is currently asking supporters to back a Democrat-sponsored bill forcing courts to ignore the juvenile crimes of adult defendants in sentencing. It received $25,000 in federal tax dollars through the state.
Also receiving funds: the Council on Islamic American Relations of Washington (CAIR-WA). It frequently engages in partisan political activism and has fundraised locally for anti-Semitic congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN).
The Bail Project Spokane received $50,000 from the fund. The nonprofit is part of the national group, which opposes cash bail. It has been responsible for paying the bail for criminals who commit high-profile crimes after release.
The more money the government spends, the worse things get. That’s a solid rule. And the coronavirus turned into a pretext for funding some of the worst of the worst. This is not how politicians sold the CARES Act, but it’s how Democrats implemented it.
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2021-02-18 08:47:112021-10-07 20:33:27CARES Act Coronavirus Relief Went to CAIR, Bail Fund for Criminals
