CLOSE to 400 doctors and over a thousand other health professionals signed an open letter to the government and media challenging the official narrative of Covid-19. The letter is reproduced at The American Institute for Economic Research and Tradition in Action. Note: I do not agree with the doctors that the original lockdown was warranted. Warning and informing the public? Yes. Quarantining healthy people? No, that is unprecedented overreach.
JAKE Gardner was attacked on May 30 by rioters who were smashing his bar in Omaha, according to news accounts and video evidence. He was knocked to the ground, got in a scuffle with one looter, 22-year-old James Scurlock, as he was trying to get up, and the shot Scurlock. He was cleared of charges by the Omaha prosecutor, who was then pressured to turn the case over to a special federal attorney. Gardner, an Iraq War veteran, reportedly ended his life while awaiting arrest on manslaughter charges. (It is possible it was not suicide.) Thousands of people had labeled him a “white supremacist.”
Preventing people from defending themselves is a form of murder.
Update:
According to Gateway Pundit, Gardner had been harassed for years, apparently simply for supporting Trump and speaking out against transgender bathrooms after a woman was assaulted by a man (or “trans woman”) in one of his bar’s restrooms. Few apparently stood up to defend him: (more…)
The murderous hag, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, supposedly the epitome of what women aspire to be, has died after years of appearing on death’s door. She was 87.
The Supreme Court is a decadent institution with a penchant for inverting the natural order of the world with desiccated abstractions. Supreme Court justices are the high priests of the American, Masonic civil religion. Their job is to wipe out the sacred and leave ordinary people to deal with the messy ramifications of their legal jousting and with the sheer ugliness of it all. They often favor big business over the little guy. They do this in rulings from their pompously pillared temple in Washington, D.C. Ginsburg stands out for her role as non-stop activist on the dark-robed Bench of Beezlebub.
“When I’m sometimes asked ‘When will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court]?’ and I say ‘When there are nine,’ people are shocked. But there’d been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that.”
Her idea of equality was often not very equal.
“Women will have achieved true equality when men share with them the responsibility of bringing up the next generation,” she said.
She denied any natural basis for longstanding sex roles and therefore denied that equality is a very complicated matter. After all men supporting women with their lifelong wage labor was indeed taking “responsibility of bringing up the next generation.”
In Gonzales v. Carhart, Ginsburg vehemently opposed a ban on “partial-birth abortion,” saying of the practice “this way of protecting women recalls ancient notions about women’s place in society and under the constitution ideas that have long since been discredited.”
It also recalls ancient notions of murder.
She absolutely loved it when men and women committed themselves to lifelong sterility. Men “marrying” men and women “marrying women,” was one of her primary causes and all of the anti-justices, she was the most activist on the issue. Her role was decisive in many court decisions.
“When oral argument for Obergefell v. Hodges were heard in the Supreme Court, the attorney for the state of Michigan argued that marriage was defined as one man and one woman and had been for thousands of years. Ginsburg replied:
“We have changed our idea about marriage is the point that I made earlier. Marriage today is not what it was under the common law tradition, under the civil law tradition. Marriage was a relationship of a dominant male to a subordinate female.” (Source)
She was a master at distorting the truth with these flat-out false assertions. Male privileges in law and custom were often meant to make up for the many privileges of women, such as the right to almost every dollar men made in work digging ditches, fixing plumbing and building highways, to mention a few of the menial occupations of men.
She made the world safer for women in combat. In United States v. Virginia, 1996, she “wrote the majority opinion that would serve as a milestone moment for women’s rights and university admission policies. The case challenged a policy by the Virginia Military Institute that barred women from being admitted to the institution. Although the state of Virginia said it would create a separate educational program for women for the military institute, Ginsberg [sic] questioned its merits, writing that ‘Women seeking and fit for a VMI-quality education cannot be offered anything less, under the Commonwealth’s obligation to afford them genuinely equal protection.’ (Source)
Women were queens long before they were Supreme Court justices. Modern revolutionaries like Ginsburg did not invent the idea of women having power or doing things other than the dishes. But they want not womanly power, they want masculine power and the sexes to be both androgynes, the complementarities and mysterious attractions that go with their differences distorted.
Ginsburg, we are told again and again, was razor-sharp brilliant.
Really?
When in Obergefell, one attorney argued that marriage was fundamentally about procreation. Ginsburg responded:
“Suppose a couple, a 70-year-old couple, comes in and they want to get married? You don’t have to ask them any questions, you know they are not going to have any children.”
She wasn’t smart enough to know that it is the cultural institution of marriage that is fundamentally about procreation? Elderly couples don’t threaten that. Men “marrying” men do.
I think she was smart enough to know that. This wasn’t brilliance so much as manipulation.
She worked to make both men and woman as materialistic, divided and non-procreative as possible, which suits the needs of … powerful people. Think of her as a warrior. The goal is to prevent the enemy from procreating. She only lacked a spear, a breastplate and visible bloodstains. She battled to undermine the greatest power women had, as makers of home and culture, and the immense privileges civilization had granted them. She would never have made a contented domestic matriarch and the Christian world had produced so many beautiful (and I don’t mean physically beautiful necessarily) examples of the type.
Has God found our legal superstar to be as witty and wise as the media is telling us she was?
Let’s just say, she fought for rights for everybody — except for Him.
MY deepest sympathy and prayers for all those affected by the raging fires in the West. So many have suffered devastating losses. I can only imagine how awful it must be to lose everything in a fire. Many suspect, due to the anomalous nature of the destruction, with houses incinerated while the trees all around remain standing and with other strange details, that these fires are not wild at all. Many suspect at least some of the fires were no more caused by "climate change," as we are being constantly told, than the riots and plandemic were. Are they a continuation of the ongoing Bolshevik Revolution and the implementation of U.N. Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030? I guess you have to be a real nut to believe that. Here, in this video, is some food for thought. (His comment about the Vatican is clueless.) The footage and photos of the damage are mind-blowing.
“IF you desire that God should hear your prayers, hear the voice of the poor. If you desire that God should relieve your wants, relieve those of the indigent, without waiting for them to importune you; especially anticipate the necessities of those who are ashamed to beg; to make these ask an alms, is to make them to buy it.” --- St. Thomas of Villanova
“What Americans are getting from Washington these days is less Big Brother than Big Mother–the new Momism of a federal government which thinks it has a duty to protect every man, woman, and child from everything….
“Even as government has failed utterly to accomplish its central mission–to protect society from crime and violence–it is meddling in all sorts of private matters that are none of its business…..”
Patrick Buchanan wrote those words in 1975 [“The new ‘Momism’ of Washington”, St. Louis Globe-Democrat, May 27, 1975, p. 8A].
What he described is called Anarcho-Tyranny. His words have even greater force today because the practitioners of Anarcho-Tyranny now include governors and mayors.
A few weeks ago, a longtime friend and I were talking about the horrors in the USA today. She and her family came to the USA from Hungary in 1957 after Communists began shooting their critics in late 1956. (more…)
1619 Frans Hals, Catharina Hooft with her Nurse (Detail)
CHILDREN can’t always articulate their thoughts and feelings. We can use intuition, common sense, practical knowledge and memories of our own childhoods to understand them. While parents generally have the best of intentions in making their children wear face masks, many people have serious concerns about this practice for the following reasons:
Masks diminish oxygen inhalation, cause wearers to breathe in carbon dioxide and could affect physical development of children.
Masks are uncomfortable and cause children to touch their faces more.
Masks are impractical because they get dirty during play.
Masks lower spatial visibility and could lead to more falls during play and while walking or running.
Masks make it difficult for children to communicate by word and facial expressions.
Masks are frightening, which is why they have often been used in occult rituals.
Masks create general insecurity about the ability of adults to protect.
Masks make it difficult to read the thoughts and intentions of adults.
Masks create an atmosphere of hostility and suspicion, which may affect the psychological development and hopefulness of children.
Masks make it hard for strangers to convey friendliness and good will to children.
Masks are habit-forming and some children will have trouble giving them up.
Masks cause obsessive worry about germs in some children. This paranoia may stay with them for many years.
Masks are ugly and children are sensitive to ugliness, which affects their spiritual development in deep and hidden ways.
Masks endanger childhood innocence by surrounding children with fears of death.
Leaving aside the incalculable, life-sustaining pleasure children’s faces give to adults, especially the frail elderly, as anyone who walks into a nursing home with a baby in her arms will instantly discover, it might be only a slight exaggeration to say that for children, faces are everything. Look at the way a calm baby fixates on the faces around him in a crowd as he looks over the shoulder of the person holding him. He seems to absorb every individual detail of the faces he sees. He does not look at the inanimate things around him. He does not look at clothes or hair. He looks at faces. He has a genius for reflecting on facial personality. What adults may consider an ugly or insignificant face, babies and very young children may find fascinating. They don’t live by the same standards of facial beauty that adults do. It’s individuality that matters to them, which we can know because they hone in on a new face. Babies are often frightened by a new face, but that’s because its individuality is overwhelming and they need time to get to know and trust it.
To tell a mother to wear a face mask while nursing her baby (and to stay six feet away from her newborn as much as possible), as the Centers for Disease Control has done, is a crime against the vulnerable young.
Imagine the little girl in the beautiful 17th-century painting above sitting on the lap of a nursemaid in a mask. Would she be so content and curious? Or would she be fretful and nervous?
Faces are the natural habitat of children, who in some ways live on a much higher spiritual plane than adults. They know the face is the seat of the soul. They are born with this knowledge: Faces are immortal and we cannot thrive or maintain good health without the faces of others. We are human beings, not automatons or biological weapons. (more…)
So in England, from Monday, we are introducing the rule of 6. You must not meet socially in groups of more than 6 – and if you do, you will be breaking the law.
This will apply in any setting, indoors or outdoors, at home or in the pub.
The ban will be set out in law and it will be enforced by the police – anyone breaking the rules risks being dispersed, fined and possibly arrested.(more…)
"YOU understand, venerable brethren, that We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning - the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever. "Surely these are they who, as the sacred Scriptures testify, "Defile the flesh, despise dominion and blaspheme majesty."(2) They leave nothing untouched or whole which by both human and divine laws has been wisely decreed for the health and beauty of life. They refuse obedience to the higher powers, to whom, according to the admonition of the Apostle, every soul ought to be subject, and who derive the right of governing from God; and they proclaim the absolute equality of all men in rights and duties. They debase the natural union of man and woman, which is held sacred even among barbarous peoples; and its bond, by which the family is chiefly held together, they weaken, or even deliver up to lust. Lured, in fine, by the greed of present goods, which is "the root of all evils, which some coveting have erred from the faith," they assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law; and by a…
IN DECEMBER 2019, Deborah Tavares predicted that Californians would be subject to intense smoke from fires and that it would be used as an economic and biological weapon. (It's more of the "sustainability" agenda to reduce population and carbon emissions. See video below.) In eery confirmation of her scenario, Californians today are experiencing raging fires and clouds of smoke from many miles away. Disclaimer: This is a not an endorsement of all Tavares's views. By the way, you cannot begin to grasp possible plots like this unless you first understand that the people behind them are not diabolical conspirators delighting in crimes against humanity, but driven idealists who believe any means justify the attainment of their abstract visions of utopia. They are human beings, not demons.
FROM “The G-20 Virus,” by Kevin Mugur Galalae (May 22, 2020):
Covid-19 is a political disease invented to accomplish the sustainability agenda, which has four overarching objectives: depopulation, decarbonization, globalization, and digitization.
First and foremost, the fake covid-19 pandemic is meant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by greatly reducing the capacity and output of entire industries deemed nonessential, bankrupting tens of thousands of companies, putting half a billion people out of work, and subjecting the rest of the global population to severe economic uncertainty and duress; all of which will result in a much lower overall carbon footprint as a result of lower individual consumption patterns and thus a giant step forward towards a neutral carbon economy.
The fake pandemic provides the plausible deniability governments need to preserve the illusion of legitimacy and the rule of law while conducting a global program of industrial sabotage or creative destruction that will allow them to restructure the global economy according to the sustainability agenda and the decarbonization prerogative. This strategy is the hallmark of all covert methods of depopulation, which is now extended to also cover the decarbonization agenda.
Since the G-20 nations are responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions, namely 74%, it falls upon them to make the greatest sacrifices in order to address this problem before the climate heats up by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius and the planet’s life support systems are damaged beyond repair.[Editor: This idea of catastrophic damage is not based in science.]
That the G-20 nations are indeed making the greatest sacrifices is revealed by the fact that they are registering the greatest number of covid-19 infections (83% of the global total) and deaths (92% of the global total), be they real or manufactured, which in turn allows them to cause the greatest economic damage to their own economies and thus the greatest reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
As such, covid-19 should be renamed the G-20 Virus or the Decarbonization Virus.
Here is the data as of 22 May 2020 … (Scroll down the page. Download not necessary.) (more…)
SWISS PROPAGANDA RESEARCH has for months offered what appears to be fair and balanced analysis of the lethality, risks and treatment of Covid-19. Here is the September update. This is a good resource, free of sensationalism.
