“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
A Simple but Nagging Question Brought to Us by RFK Jr., “Sudden Death”, Unnaturally Red Salmon, and My Dearly Beloved Cheese Balls
I must begin this discussion by admitting that I’m very pro-freedom – and that includes the freedom to conduct honest business without government intervention – which intervention would include taxes. In fact, I have tended, over my lifetime, to scoff at people who want to restrict business over what I generally regard as unfounded allegations of harm.
Thus, I approached the following video, and its enclosing article, with some skepticism. Please read and watch, if you have not already.
Cory Booker? Do they mean, lying, hoaxing, finger-wagging Marxist Cory Booker?
Cory Booker, ally of the Maoist Obama minion Kamala Harris, and assisting perpetrator of the Jussie Smollett lynching hoax?
(No, Michelle Obama and Jussie Smollett didn’t really say that when they were laughing. This is called a “meme”. It’s a form of propaganda and satire. In this case, it is responding to propaganda, fraud, and deception perpetrated by Jussie Smollett, Kamala Harris, and Cory Booker.)
THAT Cory Booker?
So what video would HE promote? More hoaxes and lies?
Let’s take a look. But color me skeptical.
OK – there is a lot to unpack here. This will take a while.
Some background. I am both a scientist, and a lover of the history of science. Far too many scientists are NOT lovers of the history of science, because if they were, they would realize how bad scientists are at spotting the wrongness of contemporaneous science. Which is ALL THE TIME.
And, that would include me. Thankfully, I have often discovered my own wrongness in science within my own lifetime. We’ll get to that, as we move along here.
Now the first thing that irritated me about this video, is the way coal tar is used as a lead-in to attack a food dye called tartrazine, a.k.a. Yellow Number Five.
It almost sounds like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFKJ hereafter) is saying that tartrazine is obtained by draining it out of coal – or if not that, out of “coal tar”, which is somehow gotten out of coal.
Just a side point. Coal tar is a very useful substance, which is actually used as a medicine for treating skin problems.
So – just from the start, it’s not totally justified to demonize coal tar. Yet on the other hand, YES, thank you – hold the coal tar on my deli sandwich, please. It IS medicine, and can even cause cancer.
But FULL STOP. Back to the point. Tartrazine is not exactly “made from coal tar”. It is made from “organic” (carbon-containing) chemicals – basic organic chemicals – that can be made in a variety of ways, from a variety of things, including coal, petroleum, natural gas, biowaste, corn, soybeans, CO2 in the air, apples, healthy fruit – WHATEVER.
See what I’m saying? Tartrazine is being demonized by association. I was ready to bitchslap RFKJ here. Bear in mind that, years ago – before the COVID nightmare and revelations after that – I considered him a NUT – and would often say as much.
AND YET. If you know the history of science and organic chemistry, RFKJ has a point. A very valid point – in that association.
RJKJ clarifies in the video (3 min 6 sec) that tartrazine is now made almost entirely from chemicals which now come from petroleum – not coal tar. However, that original time period – the coal tar days – has something to teach us.
The discovery of synthetic dyes like tartrazine was back when mankind was in a state of “chemical hubris” not unlike the “biological hubris” of current times.
In the same way that we now look back and face-palm at the “irrational exuberance” of early organic and medicinal chemistry, which gave us the hormonal poison diethylstilbestrol (DES), injected into millions of pregnant women before we realized that it damaged their daughters, so we will one day look back at the “clot shot” – marveling at the combination of ignorance (most people), hubris (most scientists), and – behind layers of global governmental denial – malevolent or warped benevolent depopulation do-gooderism (top-secret scientists and psychopathic power players), that pushed bad experimental vaccines on an almost unsuspecting but increasingly skeptical public.
Once I was in the state of seeing the historical analogy, I was ready to realize that there is almost no excuse for allowing anything into food that is not food or a known nutrient.
If one asks WHY Yellow Number Five is in those wonderful-tasting but unnaturally yellow cheese balls, it is obvious – the chemical makes the cheese balls look “cheesier” in a weird but highly unnatural way. It’s psychological. It’s an “allowed psy-op” by makers of food.
Or take salmon. The last time I looked at a really good deal on salmon in the grocery store, I noticed that it was just a bit too strangely orange. Reading the label, there was an admission that the salmon “might” be treated with some dyes to keep it looking attractive.
Suddenly, the salmon didn’t look quite as good to me. It still looked reasonable, and I toyed with the idea of buying it. But I didn’t. In this post-mRNA world, I elected to put off a buy until I could do more research.
So now, after watching this video, I realize that RFKJ is correct. Dyes make foods more appealing, but they do so in a very deceptive way. To me, if dyes have ANY risks, putting them in food makes almost no sense, other than we are allowing “deception in the quality of food” as a kind of freedom. Well, murdering people, stealing their things, and doing other bad things to them are “freedoms” we used to have as humans – and we did away with those freedoms, while keeping most of the rest.
And yet, the enjoyment of food is right there in the Declaration of Independence.
Because I believe in freedom, including the pursuit of happiness in cheese balls and salmon, I don’t want to tell you what to believe, but I will tell you what I believe.
Some people may want vaccines with side effects and risks. I personally don’t, but I want those people to be free to have their vaccines – but not force them on me or my children. And I want the TRUTH about those vaccines to be KNOWN. Not just a little known – A LOT KNOWN.
Some people may want unnaturally yellow cheese balls. I certainly don’t – not any more. I would like some nice, corn-and-cheese-looking cheese balls that I know are healthy for me. But other people may want the yellow cheese balls with strange dyes. Is there a way that we BOTH can be happy? As the founding fathers wanted?
I would like to see more foods without risky, unnatural additives. I would like to see TRUTH IN FOOD and TRUTH IN DRUGS.
I think there is a way forward that will make America HEALTHIER, FREER, and TRUER.
But we have to be honest, if we want to get there.
And what do you know – there are now some people who believe in honesty! And they’re going to be in office, if we continue to support them!
Just a personal author’s note before getting started. The provided links are supporting evidence of my opinions and claims. Rest assured there are many, many more in each subject I discuss if you should choose to verify or seek more information.
Why Stories About Fire?
I am focusing my efforts in these American Stories on revealing conditions that are optimum for the long running globullist criminal cabal to execute plans to achieve their world domination goals. Currently I am drilling down on the subject of their use of fire. The Great Chicago Fire led off in Part I. A fraud perpetrated on Americans that continues to this day. With this part we will take a look at a couple of different types of fire – oil field fires and wildfires. There are a significant number of links to peruse that are integral to the theme of the story. As with most things to do with the globullist criminal cabal, nothing is as it appears.
With the recent work of A Midwestern Doctor on substack concerning the Lahaina, Maui fires from his somewhat unique medical background perspective, I will not be addressing it unless additional disclosure is needed. With the tools we all have available now, any of us could choose to follow the story closely and observe what happens to Lahaina and its residents over the coming years. The globullist criminals do not really care if we know what they do anyway. With uncontrolled power that has corrupted the American governmental and economic systems, they fear no repercussions. Below is a link to his story.
It makes me sick to my stomach when I open our honeymoon photo album and remember our outings in Lahaina nearly 40 years ago. I feel so bad for the people who live there and especially for those who lost their homes, businesses and/or loved ones. We offer special prayers for those affected in the spirit of mahalo. The world lost a unique community and centuries of history that the native Hawaiians shared with everyone who visited that special place.
Moving forward for purposes of this story, when did you last hear about a major oilfield fire that was not connected to acts of war and/or sabotage? You probably cannot recall any of note because they are not common place. Starting with the early days of the wildcatters; over time the industry developed, improved safety techniques were employed, and innovative equipment was introduced to reduce chances of blow outs and accidental fires. The reported major fires we read or hear about today usually involve above ground facilities, transport, etc.; which are easier for saboteurs to access or for real accidents to occur. The most dangerous that involve the wells associated with underground oil reserves, well, not so much.
The most celebrated American oil field fire fighter, the legendary Red Adair, handled a couple thousand during his 50 years in the business; although some major ones in his latter years of life were war related such as in Kuwait during the first Iraq War. He even consulted for a movie called Hellfighters that involved oil field fire fighting that starred John Wayne. The media and entertainment industry incorporated the theme of uncontrolled disastrous fires into their fare as the years rolled by.
Shifting to wildfires, to connect and amplify we can go with a current television show to help fuel the fires of emotions to normalize the fearful expectations of wildfires with viewers.
Building on themes such as that, they use DC media propagandists to tie oil field fires and wildfires together…
The truth is that for the most part, oil field fires are a rarity and above ground incidents are generally well contained. As you can see the propagandists still attempt to tie them together as threats to humanity. So, what is the real plan that incorporates all of the attention and hype?
Why, “Climate Change” Of Course!
They always provide sheeple an explanation that fits the narrative…
Except, CNN, arson and accidents caused by humans are the primary causes per government data. But let’s not confuse the issue with facts. Yet, here is another from our nazi government…
At least the NPS leaves out climate change speculation on their web page below. They also state up front that nearly 85% of all wildland fires in America are started by humans. Truth coming from a federal government agency? To borrow a phrase, “What’s up with that?”
They must not have received the globullist memo about climate change being the real cause behind it all. However, that does not stop more scammers in need of research funding from indirectly blaming war on climate change.
The government even has this mapping to help us. Turns out there are several of these mapping sites from various orgs and government entities and you will one see later in this story.
Notice the ring of fire in the west along with fires in Alaska? I guess those fires are never extinguished because I have not seen them change in quite some time. 😀
What Gives?!
Oil Field Fires, Wildfires, Wars – our world is burning down because of… climate change?
OK, for fun –
That song is not that far off, is it? Stress points across the board stirring fears and distracting the masses from what is really going on in the belly of the beast; which is the creating and conducting of a fire sale of America and its assets and resources to the globullist criminals while the deplorable weirdo people are focused elsewhere on the destruction and loss of life. They create the stress points that promote fear porn with the propagandist media and “entertainment industry” fanning the flames while deep state bureaucrats quietly add restrictive regulations on private property behind the scenes to increase costs to the point of making it nearly impossible to privately own property unless your name is BlackRock.
One big, deadly pysop. Rinse and repeat, again and again and again.
The Scam
The ramp up and rally around climate change endangering the world has been around as a scare tactic for the greedy power seeking criminals for a very long time, however, it began in earnest in America when Slick Clinton went into office. Al Gore took the lead as most know. Our Gail Combs has more than ably covered the reality of the climate debate in our world in a thread available on The QTree. As is the case with most things presented by the “experts” in America and the rest of the world, you can be assured that the opposite view from what they present will likely be the most truthful. Gail proves that statement accurate with data and facts. The change we need to prepare for in this climate cycle is actually global cooling. Yes, global cooling cycles are a thing and have been recorded and theorized about throughout history.
For some reason (😂) Mother Nature does not read the globullist created fake data, charts and analysis. She does not get the memo. She does what she does for reasons that are quite scientific, but, unacceptable to the desires of the narrative builders. Mother Nature tends do her own thing by ignoring calendars and working without regard to man’s desires and the recording of time. Thankfully.
Will end this scam discussion with the following. Does the use of fire by the globullist criminals correspond with the climate change scam in an attempt to divert observance of the significant benefits that carbon dioxide and the greening of the world provides? If so, that would also seem to indicate that droughts and desert conditions must work in the favor of the globullist criminals.
Barren, dry areas produce very little of significant value for mankind on their surfaces, which is why people do not cluster within them very often. Mankind needs God given natural resources to survive and even thrive. Barren, dry areas push population toward areas with more natural resources, housing, jobs, and recreational opportunities. Clustering then occurs. The value to the globullist criminals is that their totalitarian goals are much easier to accomplish when the people are clustered together.
It is not what is above the surface they seek in those barren areas. They seek what is underground, which will be addressed in the Reality section below. This scam can all be reduced to this very simple principle. You own it, they want it, and they will do whatever they need to do to take it from you as inexpensively as possible.
Reality
Fire has proven to be a great thing for humanity. Living well has depended upon it since the first fire was built by ancients to cook what they hunted as well as to stay warm in cold conditions.
Fire is also used to put out fire, to remove the fuel that wildfires must have to continue burning. Fires conducted in controlled situations are beneficial to the environment. Living near the Great Smoky Mountains National Park we experience the use of fire for that purpose annually in sections of the Park. It helps remove scrub and dying vegetation while providing nutrients to the soil to assist the growth of native grasses, plants and trees that are beneficial to wildlife.
If fire is not used for wicked purposes it is simply a tool for good. Yet, the globullist criminal cabal wants you to focus on its destructive elements. That makes fear of oil field fires and wildfires a useful tool to exploit people by increasing anxiety and even depression leading to an easier sale of climate change. When the population of the world buys into climate change it increases the wealth and world control of those who promote it. As a reminder, the latter are not nice people who care about the needs of others.
In reality, a growing number of people now understand that the climate change movement (religion) has been a corrupted tool to effect certain human behaviors that lead people to believe and do the will of the globullist criminals. What they sell, order and mandate others to do; they do not do themselves. They view human life as livestock. In their minds you exist because they allow you to exist for their purposes.
If they can use fire to influence people to believe in climate change and the dangers of fossil fuels, many people will give in to what they want. In so doing they can then successfully enslave the population to help achieve their longer term goals.
Let us assume a wildfire has indeed ravaged an area. What happens afterwards generally also reveals who benefits most from the disaster. For many people there are insufficient funds to rebuild even if treated fairly by insurers or through government financial assistance. For others the losses endured are simply too much to overcome emotionally to return to an area. In other instances the land or infrastructure itself has been too damaged to safely rebuild in a reasonable period of time. One needs only watch the hot, fire producing lava on Hilo flow and completely change the topography to know – nope – not going back even if one wanted to do so.
The globullists know all of that. They can acquire an affected property for a small fraction of the previous value if it sits near the disaster area, even if it was not damaged. They observe the behavior of the people who have endured the hardships and then influence the negativity to be worse than reality through fear porn, anxiety, angst, etc. ginned up through the propagandist media and influencers in the communities who receive compensation for services rendered. They have pre-event access to triggers (arsonists, planned “accidents”, etc.) that cause many of the fires; deep pockets to capitalize on the events; and the government nazis to back their efforts with excessive regulations, red tape and purchased opposition.
Have you ever noticed how relief funds and insurance settlements are nearly always delayed for long periods to residents and small business owners, yet, the bureaucrats can flush out billions to fight proxy wars and fund foreign interests in seconds? They know that many will grow weary, accept less than what is due or just walk away. These vultures are poised to pounce at all times and consider it great fun to take advantage of the misery.
Within the boundaries of America exists many of the most valuable natural resources for energy, research, manufacturing, timber and agriculture per square inch than anywhere else on earth. When included with neighboring Canada, the abundance is astonishing. We have enough to share with the world to enhance all lives.
Which is why we are being infiltrated, invaded as well as abused by our own government. The globullist criminals do not believe in sharing the wealth, they want to control it all. Klaus Scwab and WEF have already informed the world of exactly that intention. The catastrophic events and actions are used to push the population away from areas they want to control. They want the resources that they know to exist above and below ground for their purposes. Where these random appearing, destructive fires are located reveals many areas they highly covet. If you see no reasons above ground they would want it, rest assured there are reasons below ground.
They have illustrated this vividly throughout history and is why I started with The Great Chicago Fire and mention the recent Maui fire. Both of those were for above ground reasons. The wildfires potentially affecting oilfields in the links are obvious. What you may not notice are the wildfires in remote areas, particularly in the western U. S. However, those areas have been geologically researched for decades and are known to hold huge mineral and fossil fuel reserves for scientific research, manufacturing and energy production purposes.
Perhaps you missed the latest news on a large lithium discovery. Ever wonder why the leftists hate fracking in PA? Clue, other than seeking to induce more misery on the region’s population, it has very little to do with natural gas production. Read the following,
If as much as 30% of our nation’s anticipated lithium needs can be met by extracting it from wastewater associated with existing fracking operations in that one state, why would leftists object to this obviously environmentally friendlier activity than mining since they are the ones pushing the Green New Deal and EV’s that use lithium batteries?
Well, it could be that many of them are investors or receive lobbyist bribes from other competing energy and manufacturing sectors. In addition some are also probably investors in the companies who hold rights to lithium deposits found in the links below.
Notice where this lithium deposit was found; in the dry, scrub land of native Americans in northern NV at Thacker Pass. Notice that ACME Lithium is one of the companies that holds rights and is active in both America and Canada. Consider this statement I found on Yahoo! Finance:
Canadian government just announced $4Billion in funding to Canadian mining projects specializing in critical minerals. “Critical minerals present a Generational opportunity in many areas…this federal government is committed to seizing this opportunity that will benefit every region across the nation and throughout the world”- Jonathan Wilkinson, Canadian Minister of Natural resources, Friday Dec 9,2022.
Then there is this one in the same area with Lithium Americas;
Might want to bet on this company since GM invested $650 million into it. With a known 46 years of lithium deposits available in just this one area it is going to be around for awhile.
Economic Realities For MAGA – Bonus Content
Will you consider a fellow QTreeper’s economic advice? I propose a quick detour from the fires.
First, President Trump knows about the lithium in the wastewater of fracking operations in PA. As a result, PA and America will experience a huge economic boost if he goes back in as POTUS. One of the reasons he is working that state so hard beyond needing it to comfortably win the election is that it fits his overall economic recovery plan for our nation. The NV mines will also be another large source of lithium to make America totally independent in meeting the growing needs for the mineral. That PA fracking provides an on-going dependable source of low cost natural gas as a source of energy for homes, businesses and industry in the region is just icing on the cake.
Second, I am not yet an EV fan. However, the commitment made by both political parties plus major international corporations indicates that we all might as well get used to the idea as it is here to stay and will be a growing segment. Most rational people realize it will be just one segment of several and not be a complete conversion. We will have a choice for the foreseeable future. As range and features improve more folks will warm up to them. Until then expect to see a growing number of charging stations installed nationwide as well as universal engineering and technology standards emerge from manufacturers. We see the charging stations going in our grocery store parking lots in rural east TN now. You will see the expansion of EV purchases in fleets of autos as well as short range commercial trucks. This will drive the scale needed for production while gradually lowering production costs to make them more affordable for the public without needing government subsidies. Elon knows this with Tesla. Who supports lithium discoveries in America and has aligned with President Trump? Yeah, that guy. It is not the only reason, but it is a major one.
Third, GM is diving in head first. They have invested big in the lithium mining, own lithium battery manufacturing plants with LG Energy Solutions, and invested big into charging stations nationwide with Berkshire (Warren Buffett) owned Pilot Flying J travel centers as I previously discussed in a BIMD story. I doubt any of these corporate giants will be backing away any time soon from the now hundreds of billions of investment collectively into the EV sector. Which tells me that their research and development is indicating sizable gains in range and shortened recharging times in the future. With scale and more units sold, prices will trend down on the vehicles, parts, and batteries packs. It will not eliminate gas and diesel fueled vehicles. However, it will reduce some capital investment into those types of vehicles. EV’s and combustion engine driven vehicles can and should coexist. Becoming totally dependent on any one industry or product is never a smart idea.
Finally, South Korea headquartered LG’s investment into the lithium batteries with GM tells you this will continue to be an international push. South Korea based Hyundai and Kia have invested big into EVs. Honda of Japan is doing likewise. European automakers entered the market years ago. China is already flooding the world with cheap, disposable crap EVs. Sort of like this relic of yesteryear.
Anybody for a Yugo?
The primary complication for full scale acceptance will continue to be electricity generation. With EV’s growing in usage and AI on the horizon, the need for electricity in America will blow past current capacity rapidly. So look for a massive investment into power generation, which will drive manufacturing growth and AI implementation. Customers will not like the massive rate increases needed, so the feds are going to need to step in to make it all happen with tax dollar subsidies and incentives to the producers of power. Expect huge changes in the electricity generation industry with a continued resurgence in nuclear and backing off from killing coal and natural gas usage.
As an example, remember the MO bootheel aluminum smelting mill closure story in BIMD, the one that supplied about a quarter of our domestic demand? The same one that is now closed that countered the Chinese smelted aluminum that goes into the manufacture of electric transformers used in power generation? The same mill that used a huge amount of electrical power generation for production in a state that acquiesced to the closure of coal fired electric power plants? It would not surprise me at all to see that mill crank back up with new investment and tax incentives after the election with PDT’s emphasis on domestic manufacturing. Missouri will probably grant a stay on the closure of those coal fired power plants and push for more natural gas and nuclear. America needs to produce its own electrical generation product necessities and not depend on buying from people who hate us on the other side of the planet. That aluminum smelting mill would help that happen.
I have now informed readers about some good industries and companies to invest in over the long term. If PDT wins the economic gains will be off the charts. If the Dems pull off another steal, this process will still continue albeit with stronger international globullist criminal involvement and emphasis. With PDT winning the smart investment play will be to go with stock picks and mutual funds that focus on domestic energy, manufacturing and distribution. If the steal happens, go international with picks and funds that have a strong concentration of stocks in these sectors. This latter international investment will still produce gains even if Trump wins because a rising sea level (or tide if you prefer) lifts all boats and America is still the sea (tide) – for now. PDT wants the petro dollar to remain the world’s currency. The globullists would prefer it as well.
Back To Fires
I will start this section with a discussion about…Ted Turner. Wut?!
One of the best business investment lessons I ever heard in person as a young business banker was while attending a Chamber event with Ted Turner as speaker. I despise the guy, but he knew how to make a lot of money. He said he made his big move in business as a young man in the billboards industry, taking over his father’s business after he committed suicide. Living and working in the growing southeastern U. S. region he noted the rapidly increasing population and traffic on the highway and interstate system. From past experience he knew billboards were highly regulated within larger city limits in various areas. Very few new structures were being permitted as well as the costs for land purchases and leases were too high to justify those that could be permitted. So he invested big in building and leasing them in the surrounding suburbs and highway systems where people were moving to live as they would be commuting into town to work along with the usual commercial and tourist traffic passing through the areas. Many times he was able to buy the land on which the structures sat. Every time the costs got too high or the cities and counties became too regulation happy he would move farther out, buy more land and build more billboards. He always went where the fast growing bedroom communities were located and he knew they would continue to expand their borders and increase business. The structures his father and he previously built that he still owned were grandfathered in the regulations and as a result became more and more valuable as time passed with the growing number of eyes on them from the increasing traffic. Eventually they became so valuable he sold many of them. Sometimes he retained the land and leased the related land parcel to the buyer of the structure if it was a good property investment with upside. Many times the land would later go on to become parts of large shopping complexes or industrial parks. He used the funding from the various sales to get into media and the television industry. The rest is history.
And yes, I shook the capitalist commie’s hand and thanked him for speaking after the event. I then went to the restroom and washed my hands. It helped inform me about the industry as I had financed small time billboard owners in the past. More importantly it gave me great insight into how some of the globullist criminals think as well as their methods of operation. With that in mind please review the FEMA map linked below;
Thacker Pass, NV is in the northern area toward the Oregon border. However, the lithium mineral reserves that have been discovered also extend south and east of the pass. The mining and extraction of lithium is water dependent and the Humboldt provides same. This area just happens to be somewhat near the large wildfires that have have been a recurring feature in the northeastern as well as the central eastern parts of NV.
Does the following look like a place where people would desire to live or supporting businesses of mines locate? How many buildings do you see?
That’s Thacker Pass, NV; the center of the lithium deposit reserves.
The wildfires are occurring east, southeast of this area in more forested, habitable areas that are more suitable and attractive to housing people and operating businesses. That area is directly en route to Salt Lake City, Utah. The Humboldt River runs east to west through the region. The town of Elko located along the river east of Thacker Pass and at the base of the Ruby Mountains is less than one hour from the eastern most point of the lithium find and two hours from the above referenced site. Elko already serves the NV gold mining industry and has been a bit of a boom or bust town historically with casinos and legal prostitution. It is a strong culture fit for what is coming. The area around it would be a logical area for new mining related support businesses to locate, which would lead to residential growth after state and local infrastructure investment. This area just so happens to be where wildfires have been burning north and south of Elko per the above referenced map.
How convenient for the wealthy to buy fire affected property at lower prices just in time for the boom to come while still selling that the wildfires contribute to the dreaded climate change. They will push the use of EV’s and their lithium battery packs to counter it. A real twofer for globullists criminals. They then go on to employ similar Ted Turner investment principles and build a gateway all the way to Salt Lake City, a distance of just 230 miles approximately, while using state and federal tax dollars to fund the infrastructure as politicians sell jobs, jobs, jobs to the unwitting NV and Utah voters.
Yup.
Do we spot more investment opportunities in this discussion? Do we know of a large cult in the region parading in the mainstream of politics who may be interested and involved?
Conclusion
Climate change is noise meant to distract you from seeing what the criminals are really doing and want from you. The wildfires and threats of oil field fires are meant to drive you from the lands they affect. The decision to stay and fight, fight, fight or go is yours alone.
As for me and my house we will do our best to live the way God intended for all of us and it will work out in accordance with His perfect will. The criminals will have a fight on their hands with us.
In FIRE Part III, I will conclude comments on this climate change push and discuss a tragic wildfire that significantly impacted our lives in east TN.
A Carefully Concealed Re-Framing of What a Boeing Insider Told Me
Sometimes it pays to simply be in the right place at the right time, and to REALIZE IT.
I have learned to stay IN THE MOMENT – to REALIZE IT IS A MOMENT – and to REMEMBER IT.
The world is a weird place. Every day, whether you fully understand it or not, you come into contact with people who have EXTREMELY interesting stories. You simply don’t hear them, most of the time.
So that person whose parent worked on the Manhattan Project, or that survivor of a serial killer, or the person who baby-sat Bill Gates – you meet them, you talk to them, but unless they open up about it for some reason, you will never know it.
There was a local radio station I remember, which had a segment called “Brushes With Fame”, and it was amazing to hear the MANY stories – because everybody has a few. You do. I do. And every poster on this site does, too.
My most recent brush with fame, was somebody with the inside story on Boeing’s problems. And this isn’t just “hearsay” – meaning it wasn’t just an insider who HEARD the story – it was somebody who knows – with their own eyes – all the details. How the story came out – I cannot say – it’s too unique.
I was SHOCKED. The story makes sense. It matches what we suspect. But most importantly, it EXPLAINS EVERYTHING.
This really needs to be said – and every member of Boeing’s board of directors needs to know this stuff – but I have to be very careful not to give so many details that the “whistleblower” is found.
And you KNOW “they” will try, because it’s what “they” do.
But this is important, so WE will try to get the word out – safely.
TL;DR – The basic problem at Boeing is terrible craftsmanship.
OK – we suspected that. But….
Why???
Here’s why.
The building of planes is being OUTSOURCED to sloppy companies, where workplace practices, procedures, and personnel are more like the roofing and cheap housing construction industries, than they are like aircraft mechanics.
The workers are young, poorly trained, barely educated, and either ignore or are not given rigorous assembly procedures. Safety checks are not done. Turnover is high. The untrained have to train the unqualified. Opportunities for wrong tools, wrong parts, and wrong procedures are everywhere and omnipresent. Those who understand disciplined assembly practices are shocked by what they see happening.
If you can imagine “clean room” technology, this is the opposite.
Management has known about this, but ignored it until the accidents and crashes made the problem too visible. They are only now reacting, and have not even BEGUN to do what should have been done years ago. And they are STILL not addressing the full problem.
The whistleblower had first-hand knowledge of all of his. I use the word “whistleblower” with some caution. This person may or may not have told any of this to other people. They may or may not have told Boeing management. I am hiding many shocking and highly validating details to make sure that the person cannot be found. But I will say this.
Boeing is not the only place where outsourcing (both foreign and domestic) created more problems than it solved. I saw the exact same thing, first-hand, in the tech and science world. QUALITY was very frequently sacrificed because the top-down orders were “global or else”, and “global” was basically some connected Chinese or Indian company getting a “didn’t earn it” job. These bad decisions were the outcome of boardroom combat by highly-paid stiffs – often people who didn’t truly understand the business, but had finagled their way into power by connections and influence, or otherwise, themselves, “didn’t earn it”.
Who can be more “global” than the other person? Who can be more cunning, in negating any criticism of sloppy work as xenophobic or nativist? Who can denigrate American quality in the smartest way – and then sell us all out – for a BONUS?
I’m not saying that Boeing is using foreign companies for outsourcing, although perhaps they are. I am saying exactly what I heard – that whoever Boeing is outsourcing to, domestic or not, it’s not working.
I do have some suspicion that CHINA is involved here – that they are sabotaging Boeing’s domestic workforce so that the economics will favor a CHINESE SOLUTION, with a CHINESE WORKFORCE, much like Apple and other companies that are now addicted to Chinese labor. That would also explain whistleblower deaths. The ChiComs are ruthless, when they think they can get away with it.
Whatever – bottom line – Boeing needs to get its act together – and that will NOT happen with “China Joe” in the White House.
Time to FIX IT. And getting Donald Trump back in the White House is a big part of MY proposal for how to do it.
This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).
Our various sister sites, listed in the Blogroll in the sidebar
Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.
Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.
We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.
Joe Biden didn’t win.
And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.
Wolfie’s Wheatie’s Word of the Week:
doppelganger
noun
A ghostly double of a living person, especially one that haunts such a person.
An evil twin.
A remarkably similar double.
Alter ego.
A person who has the same name as another.
A book by anti-Trump feminist Naomi Klein, about Trump-friendly feminist Naomi Wolf.
From Wikipedia
A doppelgänger (/ˈdɒpəlɡɛŋər, -ɡæŋər/), sometimes spelled as doppelgaenger or doppelganger, is a biologically unrelated look-alike, or a double, of a living person. In fiction and mythology, a doppelgänger is often portrayed as a ghostly paranormal phenomenon and usually seen as a harbinger of bad luck. Other traditions and stories equate a doppelgänger with an evil twin. In modern times, the term twin stranger is occasionally used.
The Book Cover
MUSIC!
How about a “fiddle chicks X bagpipe grlz” video?
It turns out there is actually a song called “Doppelganger”. It’s not bad at all, but kinda sad.
How about some fresh country? Just found this song!
OK, let’s finish with a TRUMP RALLY SONG! WOOHOO!!!
THE STUFF
The stuff, this week, is about Naomi Klein vs. Naomi Wolf.
I began by picking up the recent “Naomi vs. Naomi” book, Doppelganger.
You’re all most likely familiar with feminist Naomi Wolf, that perennial guest of Steve Bannon. She, the anti-COVID-vaccine-fighter extraordinaire, whose stellar work on the Pfizer FOIA documents caused Rochelle Walensky to flee her harpy perch at CDC for better cover.
There is another feminist who is sometimes confused with Wolf, named Naomi Klein. Klein is a cabal defender, ultimately, but she has managed a bit of some weak “insider” criticism on the left – enough to be considered an intellectual – not enough to lose her perks and privileges.
Supposedly because Klein is sometimes mistaken for Wolf, and takes wrongly directed criticism from the left for it, Klein decided to attack Wolf, and hence the book. Or at least, that is her story.
Right now, both the Kindle version and the hardback version of Klein’s book are $15, which means that the hardcover is NOT doing well in those cabal bookstores like Barnes & Lucifer.
“WHAT???!!!” – you may be saying. Why would this Wolf (“DA WOOF”) be picking up RADICAL LEFT TRASH?
The book is basically one long REEEEEEEEEE!!!!!, and it’s glorious, and that is why I bought it.
More specifically, the book is a left-wing, globalist, overly verbose, incredibly narcissistic, and eye-rollingly navel-gazing attack by stereotypical “New York culture, Canada address” feminist Naomi Klein on “MAGA-friendly liberal” feminist Naomi Wolf.
Once I realized how much of a REEEEEEEEEE!!! this book was, I began laughing in the store at every breathless outrage, and eventually realized that I needed to buy it.
The thing is, Naomi Klein is OBSESSED with Naomi Wolf, and the more one reads, the more one understands that FAKERY is chasing AUTHENTICITY – obsessed – because Fakery cannot stand to be in the same room as Authenticity, and yet it MUST be in that room, getting all the attention, so it has to ATTACK what it cannot be.
In the same way that people like Romney, Pelosi, Obama, Kasich, and all the rest are OBSESSED with Trump, and simply MUST try to destroy him – in the same way that Satan is OBSESSED with Christ, and must try to destroy Him, so Naomi Klein is obsessed with the “other Naomi” whose coattails she rode in on, and from whose coattails she exited, in the name of holding onto respect by the media, the government, and the rest of the elite.
It is my belief that Naomi Klein is the real doppelganger, and that her work is a kind of sub-critical hysterical confession. IMO, Klein always benefited from confusion with Naomi Wolf – until Naomi Wolf “walked the walk” right into the fire – in a way that Naomi Klein could not follow, nor even pretend to “talk the talk” without losing her seat at the elite table.
Wolf lost her academic position for speaking the truth. Klein still has hers. Do the math.
Klein wrote a book called The Shock Doctrine, which was a very insightful look at how neo-liberal corporate capitalism piles into crisis to make money. Klein was basically starting to see the phoniness of things like the Green New Deal. The problem was, she could never go far enough, because she’s too close to the agenda. Whether Klein can’t see, won’t see, or is just pretending not to see, it doesn’t change the outcome – she doesn’t see.
Klein can never see – nor admit that she sees – the corruption of centralized government, working hand-in-hand with phony crisis capitalism.
COVID and the vaccines provide a perfect example. Klein simply can’t leave the plantation. She stays safely on the “Bad Wolf” designated cheer circle, criticizing Wolf for departing from “the science” into “conspiracy theories”, and utterly refusing to admit that “the science” is no longer interested in saving pleb lives, when government money, taken from the plebs, is there for the taking.
Does Klein know? Is she wise to the globalist scam? Probably, IMO.
Klein also takes some interesting heat from the left.
For example, Klein is seen as a bit too friendly toward big-government-big-corporation-big-NGO-big-academia solutions, and the “gang-green” take her out for not going totally Maoist and anarchist on climate change, like those brave souls who glue themselves to roads, art exhibits, and whatnot.
Whatever. The bottom line is that I took one for the team, to figure out what’s up with this Klein broad. Save your money – don’t buy the book unless you want to “see the REE“!
In cases of religious mass suicide/homicide, such as Jonestown, Heaven’s Gate, and Aum Shinrikyo, it is very difficult to regain a humanitarian understanding of the key participants after the infamy of defining events sears the conscience and redefines reality.
Even more difficult, however, is the opposite – to BEGIN to think the unthinkable and speak the unspeakable, that we all seem to know is true, but which we can only comprehend in principle, not in reality.
It is almost impossible to leave the past where we could trust – and yet, we were warned about this.
Who are we taught to trust the most? This will not be easy. The END. Q
You don’t understand “revolutionary suicide”. But you need to understand it – and soon.
Those who believe in “revolutionary suicide” for most of humanity as a “solution”, are acting on that belief, because “there’s no time”.
This message about “there’s no time” was not meant as much for you, as it was meant for the people with the pitchers of Koolaid, and the people with the guns, stationed around the perimeter of the compound.
Put on your seatbelts. The truth about what is going on is going to blow you away.
Those who first noticed and described the “religion of climate change” likely had no idea that they were literally correct, but they were. It’s a cult.
The Frankfurt Marxist experiment called “Peoples Temple” and its fateful concept of “revolutionary suicide” explains all aspects of the current deadly social experiment, from Green New Deal, to Great Reset, to the semi-failed population control shot, meant to transition us into integrated population control as part of [socialized] medicine.
The climate-conned progressives had a dream. That dream, being built on a stolen election, is already “pre-failing”, but not fast enough.
We are dealing with a cult. As in the case of many cults, they are a group of well-meaning, good-intentioned people, who have a bit too much faith in their human leadership obsessed with human solutions, and not quite enough faith in God.
When the convincing argument met a pesky commandment, exceptions were made.
Now before you tell me I’m wrong, and that they’re all distinguishably and remarkably evil, unlike us, the good guys and better girls, take a minute to cool off and remember why your Bible said why we should not take too much pride in ourselves, my fellow sinner. Kurt Vonnegut turned the clarity of his PTSD-enhanced vision for our hypocrisy into a career. We could all use a bit of that vision.
Oh, there is evil mixed in – swirled into the goodness like poison until it’s tasteless – and that’s exactly why it’s hard to detect.
It’s easy to think of cults as purely evil and therefore incomprehensible, but it’s not a great way to comprehend their danger. It is when you examine their humanity, as we walk among them and smile, and they smile back with an equally human face, that you see WHERE and HOW the danger arises.
I have learned so much about God in following this story. Hopefully some of that EXTREMELY important part will help to freely convince you that you, too, need God – even if that God exists for you in the most abstract way possible – to keep you from falling into mental traps which, paradoxically, come from our human self-reliance and “realism”.
God is a weird idea that almost has to exist by emergent self-creation from our reality, like calculus does. Where does God come from? For that matter, where does math come from? What is the weird mathematics of infinity a subset of?
Simply believing there is more, and that it is not inherently against us, but for us, as demonstrated by our own existence, seems to be key to avoiding error. If you can accept that much of a Cartesian “God”, good. It is enough.
Ground yourself in God before you go on reading this. It is our lifeline back from diabolical error.
Why [Sometimes] Jones Was Right and We Were Wrong
I’m shocking you with that title of this section for a reason.
Jones was not right about everything, obviously. But he was right about enough, that if you can use that to begin to understand his motivations, and his correct thinking on some things, you can see where and how he and his followers were led astray.
This quality of being “right about too much, but misleading in the end” is VERY typical of communism, and Jones was, if you read Peoples Temple thinking, a communist of the Frankfurt School type. His Peoples Temple was a living experiment in resolving all the accused bugaboos of Western society – the “oppressions” – that critical theory challenged.
Jones saw unnecessary, systemic, racial problems and wanted to do something about them. Jones saw marginalization of women and felt it inherently wrong. Jones saw the collectivist aspects of earlier forms of Judaism and Christianity, and felt that they could not be ignored. Ironically, he did not see the power and possibility of the “greatest collective” – all of us living independently and harmoniously in a free and truthful world – but that is what made Jones perfect as a micro-reactor experiment for the creation of a very progressive “woke Christianity”. And that is exactly what he was. Woke Christianity, only 40 or 50 years ago.
Jones saw that American Christianity could be made more “social” – or socialist – and discovered that it actually worked, when judged by metrics of earthly success.
When I began to read some writings by a leftist sympathizer of Peoples Temple, based largely on the viewpoints of insiders and survivors, and she described my own deficient thinking about the People’s Temple correctly, and how I was part of the misunderstanding and minimizing thereof, I gained deep insight into not only the truly leftist nature of the Peoples Temple, which was clearly a fellow traveler of cultural Marxism, but also how seductive both critical theory is, and the Peoples Temple was. Even the analysis itself was seductive, in correctly describing the flaws of my own views of Jonestown. However, the devil is in the details, because sympathy for the people of Jonestown can easily whitewash the truth about bitter flaws in their collective, and collectivist, dream.
In the end, it’s Jesus versus Stalin. Stalin, sadly, beat Jesus in the world of Jim Jones.
Stalin will mislead you into demanding or committing harm of others for the good of the whole, whereas Jesus will lead you as an individual into sacrifice of self for the good of others.
It’s a subtle difference, but it makes all the difference in the bigger outcome.
To gain the same insights I got, you can beneficially read the same writings I did. Start here.
Not the least reason to read this, is that it reviews the FACTS of the history and the shocking, sad end of the Jonestown experiment.
Even more importantly, this reading exposes and explains strong parallels to the Climate Cult. It does so by exposing the thinking of Peoples Temple members from the inside. This thinking very obviously maps to the thinking of the Climate Cult.
Formation of the collective – mass formation psychosis – creates a world layered on this one, beautiful and addictive as hell, and soon to be enhanced by the “metaverse”. But threaten that world, or merely create the perception of threat, and the mass can be manipulated into remarkable behaviors.
Ah, the FURY that Malone’s utterance of “mass formation psychosis” provoked in the media.
To provide some contrast with the Jonestown collective’s broken view of itself, I am providing a short “outsider bibliography” on the Jonestown cult, which is differently broken, as you can see from the demonstrated preconceptions, psychological defenses, and capitalist myopias that the insider narrative points out. But be careful. Sympathy for the Jonestown victims, and understanding of them as good people much like us, can lead to sympathy for the devils that seduced them. Just because our devils hounded them, doesn’t mean that their devils didn’t destroy them.
Same goes for the Climate Cult.
If you ever had any sympathy for the Branch Davidians, you will get what I’m saying. It is much easier to see the evil in Cankles and her crew of nogoodniks in the Climate [Control] Cult, by having at least some sympathy for one of their victims – the flawed Christian cult of David Koresh. (Yeah, that gets complicated.)
Anyway, some comparisons. Here – let’s trivialize the victims!
This next one is a rough gem – very anti-Jones, but exposes the dynamic of the suicidal closest layer of followers, who are willing to be homicidal to the greater outer layer – and THAT is exactly what applies to the Climate Cult.
Now – I told you that you didn’t understand “revolutionary suicide” – so let’s fix that.
Revolutionary Suicide
What is revolutionary suicide? It is – at its core – simply taking the ultimate exit from an unjust society, instead of fighting against it. Here is Jim Jones in his own words:
We committed an act of revolutionary suicide protesting the conditions of an inhumane world.
Looking beneath that statement, trying to understand what constitutes “the conditions of an inhumane world”, I believe that what we find is the failure of the Peoples Temple cult to navigate reality. Jim Jones tried everything he could, to make his utopian vision take hold in reality, but his vision ran into more and more conflicts with the real world outside his cult, until the legal and judicial systems had Jones in a state of constant challenge. Even fleeing America itself did not work. In Guyana, the conflicts grew, until legal actions against Jim Jones were imminent. Jones correctly realized that he had nowhere left to go, and thus could not maintain his vision of the Peoples Temple. Jones could not even flee to the Soviet Union – one of the options that was always on the group’s table of discussion. Jones knew that he was politically radioactive, and no longer useful to the Soviets.
“Revolutionary suicide” is the ultimate “take your bag of marbles and go home” move – but remember – THAT is also a perfect description of individual suicide.
As a number of individuals in the Jonestown cult felt the world crashing down upon them, with the increasing problems of the cult, some felt suicide was the answer. Jones was sorely tempted by this route.
I have to ask – was the Climate Cult moved ahead in its schedule by external forces? Ask the question, because it seems to me that the answer is yes. The very defects in their plan that allowed us to see it all, may have been the result of schedule changes forced by the Trump election.
Whether individuals or groups are hounded by their own perception of external criticism, or by actual hounding, it doesn’t matter – suicide can be the result. See January Sixth, as well.
The greatest moral problem with all group suicides, including “revolutionary suicide”, is that these deaths are not free of hounding or worse, this time internal, and themselves approach or even constitute murder. Hounding, tricking, and otherwise coercing the GROUP to fully participate is the reality of the act.
Innocent people who want to LIVE are forced to DIE.
Thus, there is a HUGE footprint of MURDER in “revolutionary suicide”. This is clear in the records of the Jonestown incident. A layer of “diehards” and “inner circle” were used to enforce the group decision, leaving only a few who managed to escape by using their wits.
Shades of the jab.
Most people do not want to commit suicide. Most religions teach against it. But not all, and I believe that the truest believers at the center of the Climate Cult are quite ready to kill and be killed for their goals.
If a CIA operative suggested “revolutionary suicide” to the Jonestown cult, it would not surprise me. Their collectivist nature was highly vulnerable to this form of exploitation. Indeed, the same may apply to other cult suicides.
Either way, whether spontaneous or provoked, the possibility of group error, including group entry into a suicidal choice, is a viral vulnerability of social beings.
So now, let’s apply this fully to the Climate Cult.
Revolutionary Climate Justice
It is my contention that the Climate Cultists who are knowingly behind the Population Control Shot are mostly recruited true believers, much like those closest to Jim Jones. This would be the most obedient layer. Beyond them, however, are many who believe most of the climate cult canon, but could not be counted on to obey morally contradictory orders such as murder or suicide.
So who took the shots? Did they all play “climate roulette”?
Doubly Vaxxed and Boosted
AND logic is your friend here. Some of the “knowing” likely virtue signaled to the climate goal by taking the statistically lethal depopulation shot – others less courageous and more cowardly rationalized their “need to survive for the sake of climate justice” and did not. Bill Clinton is a great example of the latter type of thinking – his view of actual obedience to feminism in men was that “exceptions need to be made for the leaders”.
Hypocrisy. It seems to be “baked in” in communism.
Either way, shot or no shot, the true-believing “there’s no time” climate cultists are, I am certain, committed to the group goal of “saving the world from climate destruction by acting now”.
You can see this in every OTHER hare-brained scheme they are rushing forward now. The “clot shot” was merely one avenue of “saving humanity”. The others are happening right now, as food and energy systems are being destroyed, both economically and physically.
Shades of Pol Pot. Who even the Vietnamese communists knew was wrong.
Yes. It’s all backwards. It’s all deluded. It’s all destructive.
They had to show us. And we are being shown.
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) were joined by Democratic lawmakers from both the House and Senate on February 7, 2019, to introduce Green New Deal legislation.
Does this all seem a bit overwhelming? Having doubts? Is it just too much?
Here are two “public” explanations I have given for “higher credibility”. First on Steve Kirsch’s blog, then on Sundance’s post on The Burning Platform. These are the same explanation, only a bit softer and easier to digest.
Great article and statement of principled science.
People refuse to speak up about the nuttiness of it all, even though most know something is wrong, and many suspect that there is an intentional component.
I’ll spell it out. Somebody has to go first. I’m retired. I can’t lose a license or chair, or my pension (yet).
To me this was a fairly smart attempt to integrate top-decided and down-to-the-individual-tunable (see “bad batch phenomenon”) population control into medicine, and in fact a rather ingenious strategy, too. A vaccine – hero of a media-led crisis – unquestionable by the masses or the media – with a known dose-response mortality curve (see again “bad batch phenomenon”) that can in principle be dialed up to achieve ZPG, as long as denial of adverse events is enforced by holding all questions outside the Overton window. The dual nature (decrease BOTH longevity and fertility/productivity) is quite smart. It’s a bit “cinematic” and even “sci-fi”, but it worked pretty well due to human psychology.
The phony climate crisis (“there’s no time!”) was surely used to recruit many of the needed life scientists to carry it out or protect the plan. THAT was ingenious. Use an alleged crisis in one part of science to find unquestioning believers as recruits in a different part of science, who could “do something” about it.
Something very interesting here, is that this theory – which I find neatly explains all the “mistakes” people in charge have made – is crystal clear once you have “sympathy” for solving the population problem. Our leaders have encouraged desperation over the “climate crisis” in the susceptible population, and scoffing in the remainder – a very useful division for concealing the plan. The desperation messaging thus bounces off the very people who would have any inclination to look critically for such a plan or planners. Those people don’t understand the desperation of a scientist driven to “save humanity”, and thus would never bother to REALLY look for such a plan. It just seems too fantastic. One has to open up to the possibility that they might, in principle, be right, just to make the idea conceivable. But just try it. What if people REALLY BELIEVED we were going to all die in ten years, or some other typical “climate scare story”? Would you “join a global team out to save the planet”? Almost sounds like something people have been trained to do by our “entertrainment”.
So have sympathy for the devil – I mean the plan – or at least its motivation – the idea that people who really think we all will die if some are not sacrificed now – why then it all makes sense.
Now, as Steve points out, the numbers aren’t there yet on the shot, although I suspect that the long numbers on cardiac and immune deaths are more than we know yet. And beyond that, perhaps this is a bit like Hiroshima and Nagasaki – a THREAT to force us to get population under control by other means. I suspect they have a strong “Plan B” for us catching them. What is it?
I don’t like being brought to a negotiation at gunpoint, and having grabbed their gun, I’m a bit pissed. But nevertheless, here we are and it is now (and I know that what I’m selling smells like moonshine, but bear with me). Are they going to try something else, or are we going to talk about this reasonably? Judging from CDC falling back to the real science now, methinks the inevitable cover-up is going on. While I myself hang around with a crowd that screams “tribunals”, and look across the aisle at Democrats who would be the first to cry “amnesty for the climate do-gooders” (I suspect the plan counted on this), I think it does behoove us to make this stuff not able to happen again, as the most important solution. Whatever phony “lessons” come out of CDC, just ain’t gonna cut it. Human science and medicine have been damaged incredibly, but I think not irreparably, as I have faith in the truth winning in the end.
I know it all sounds fantastic, but go back over the “errors” people have made, driving toward “fair” universal deployment of the shot, and imagine that they were “trying to help”. Things start to make sense. But yes – it would be a bit cult-like, and it helps VERY much to read about the very lefty People’s Temple and “revolutionary suicide”, which is almost a model for this.
I will say this. These are NOT unforeseen consequences. They are “necessary consequences” in the eyes of the true-believing “climate cult”. A literal cult which was very intentionally created. Created to do exactly what it’s doing. And I have some new thinking on it that is difficult to speak just yet, but essential to understand.
I am now absolutely convinced that the “dumb vaccine” was a very intentional plan by these same people to achieve the same goal.
When people assert that the CIA was behind Jim Jones and Jonestown, or studied Jonestown – oh – they don’t know the half of it.
If you know anything about the Frankfurt school, their fingerprints are all over this lab experiment.
They were WAY ahead of us.
In the last couple of days, I have come to understand the relationship of Jones as a model for the Climate Cult. Even the race obsession and CRT figures into prepping this psychological attack on humanity. The weird racial and sexual psychology of that cult was a key feature, also present now.
There is a joke meme about Jonestown and Fauci, but ironically, the very communist followers of Jim Jones who survived have an excellent, critical theory-based, Frankfurt-school critique of how we, the capitalist dupes, joke about their “revolutionary suicide”, as they called it, and don’t take anything they did seriously.
They can describe us accurately. We need to describe THEM accurately. This is no longer a joke.
That mentality has been WEAPONIZED against not just America, but THE WORLD.
I’ll have more about this later today, in my “population control shot” series.
The point is, it all ties together. “They” – whoever “they” are at the top – have used a CULT they have created – to “downsize” and “disempower” humanity against its will, in defiance of all common sense.
It’s VERY culty behavior – the irrationality and schizoid behavior of the key participants (Pete Buttigieg and his SUV-to-show-bike stuff) is a feature, not a bug.
Hopefully those explanations have helped you formulate your own opinions – whether you now think I’m onto something, whether you just can’t buy any of this stuff, or something in between.
Either way – where do we go from here?
Reject Climate Insanity Completely
The world is being destroyed by foolish choices, based on insane “solutions” to BAD SCIENCE which was LOCKED IN BY MONEY.
But don’t worry – we have time.
Trump is right – we can “build back a third time” after their latest destruction, even if many lives are lost or worsened in the process.
It’s tough, but accepting bad elections has consequences. Both GOPe and RINOs need to suffer for their sins. Smart solutions will now take time, where rush jobs (like AGW) lead to HACK SOLUTIONS like Windows Me or the spike protein, take your pick.
I’m not in a rush – I think we can wait until we’re at the brink, so that everybody agrees – this is all nuts.
BUUUUUT – I do have a solution, of how to get to that brink of “all the sane people agree” much faster.
In many ways, I am going to back up Sundance’s approach.
Stated differently, SCREW THE VIRTUE SIGNALS. We can’t afford to politely agree with the CRAP any more. Let people KNOW that it’s crap, that you don’t agree with it, and that you will not vote for anybody who even puts up with the crap when THEY are faced with it.
The CRAP is destroying the world, and WE don’t go along with it.
I repeat. You need to stop virtue signaling to the mainstream narratives, and most importantly THE CLIMATE NARRATIVE, in any form.
It you want to know the ONE REASON why Trump was not “allowed” to be President, I can tell you with near certainty – it is because he REJECTS the “climate games” in their entirety.
Trump LOVES the environment, but he REJECTS the weird corporate “bad science” that was layered into it, with the absurd CO2-based climate change story. And so do I. I reject their bad science and even more their toxic workarounds that stem from the bad science.
[Note: I have watched “climate science” from the beginning, and I have NEVER seen science that convinced me of anthropogenic global warming climate change being real – much less a threat to humanity, even if it was real. Indeed, I see an incipient ice age as the far greater threat – and one that is EASILY dealt with by following the path we were on before SOMEBODY decided to downgrade humanity rather than upgrading our technology. ]
No. Just NO. We don’t put up with climate insanity (please call it that), nor do we put up with those who TOLERATE IT. Not just those who advocate it. Those who TOLERATE IT.
And THAT gets to the SECOND point.
This point bears on Sundance’s shrewd recognition of the “DeSantis problem”.
We need to goad all GOP candidates into the “WEF unacceptable zone”.
Why is DeSantis acceptable to the establishment Republicans? Is it because he will tolerate climate nuttiness? The ONE necessity for a nod from Davos?
Personally, I like DeSantis, but I see clearly that the other side is using him to derail Trump. They have a smart strategy there. Evil, but smart.
Well, one way to thwart that is for DeSantis to join Trump in denouncing the climate insanity in no uncertain terms. In terms that are so strong, they make him utterly unacceptable to WEF and the quislings in GOPe.
“It’s wrong. It’s a hoax. It’s destroying the planet. It has to stop.”
And then, to spread it, a little criticism of even the slightest climate belief as a RINO position should put the fear of God in Washington.
Oh, DeSantis’s RINO advisors will go through the ROOF, but tough times call for tough measures. Klaus Schwab, Larry Fink and the Rothschild entourage need to burn in anger at the rejection. And while we’re on Fink, ESG needs to DIE. Kill it, before it kills humanity.
Climate insanity is crap, and it needs to end. NOW.
This means that a lot of GOP need to feel the STING – the BURN – of rejection.
When they so much as NOD to the bullshit, they PAY WITH THE BASE.
Are we clear? GOOD.
BURN THEIR GOD, CLIMATE CHANGE, AT THE STAKE.
Final Thoughts
We have to grab the steering wheel. It’s that simple. We’re not going to kill anybody. We’re not going to have an “insurrection”. We’re going to demand that these assholes who have fucked everything up, stand down with their insanity and their corruption.
EVERY. SINGLE. FUCKING. DAY. You are going to have to make these people feel like CRAP for supporting INSANITY and causing HAVOC.
Get tough. It’s the only way forward. But you can do it.
How Two Fallen Theories of Medicine May Herald the Fate of Global Warming / Climate Change
Bad science does not stand forever, but it may stand long enough for people to make a lot of money on it. THAT will be the THEME of the three huge science scandals I’m going to discuss.
In case you’re short on time, the TLDR…..
TL;DR – Two fresh scandals showing how industry money and scientific misconduct kept bad theories “alive” for decades, may explain why the bad science behind politically useful climate alarmism persists.
I. Serotonin Uber Alles
The “serotonin scandal” is very diffuse, which is why it’s in many ways analogous to “climate change”. The bottom line is that what the pharmaceutical industry tells patients about antidepressants, and what scientists know about antidepressants, are not the same thing.
It’s best to start off with the following Tucker Carlson video.
An extremely important selling point of antidepressants, used by both doctors and the pharmaceutical industry, is the idea that people who are depressed, and therefore “need” to take them, actually have some kind of chemical imbalance in their brain that needs to be fixed. More often than any other chemical alleged to be “imbalanced” is serotonin – and hence the emergence of SSRIs, meaning serotonin-selective reuptake inhibitors.
Carlson’s centerpiece is a recent metaanalysis of antidepressant research which showed there is little or no evidence for this “chemical imbalance” assertion.
Antidepressants may work in some people, and thank God they do, but IF they do, and WHEN they do, the simple “chemical imbalance theory” is probably not the reason why.
There is a very good explanation of the study HERE:
No evidence that depression is caused by low serotonin levels, finds comprehensive review
After decades of study, there remains no clear evidence that serotonin levels or serotonin activity are responsible for depression, according to a major review of prior research led by UCL scientists.
The new umbrella review – an overview of existing meta-analyses and systematic reviews – published in Molecular Psychiatry, suggests that depression is not likely caused by a chemical imbalance,and calls into question what antidepressants do. Most antidepressants are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which were originally said to work by correcting abnormally low serotonin levels. There is no other accepted pharmacological mechanism by which antidepressants affect the symptoms of depression.
Lead author Professor Joanna Moncrieff, a Professor of Psychiatry at UCL and a consultant psychiatrist at North East London NHS Foundation Trust (NELFT), said: “It is always difficult to prove a negative, but I think we can safely say that after a vast amount of research conducted over several decades, there is no convincing evidence that depression is caused by serotonin abnormalities, particularly by lower levels or reduced activity of serotonin.
“The popularity of the ‘chemical imbalance’ theory of depression has coincided with a huge increase in the use of antidepressants. Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen dramatically since the 1990s, with one in six adults in England and 2% of teenagers now being prescribed an antidepressant in a given year.
“Many people take antidepressants because they have been led to believe their depression has a biochemical cause, but this new research suggests this belief is not grounded in evidence.”
Just for the record, I am personally NOT a fan of these sorts of “metaanalysis” papers. In my opinion they tend to be QUASI-OPINIONS with a veneer of science. However, in my own opinion, metaanalyses can be useful when highly conclusive or by reinterpreting data – but should be trusted even less than normal observational science.
Now – it is important to point out that this metaanalysis is not actually telling us anything NEW. Most scientists in the field ALREADY KNEW from all the various studies that were looked at by the metaanalysis, that the simple “chemical imbalance” idea was a load of crap. They’ve known this for YEARS.
REALLY? Yes. Really.
A good description of the state of things is here:
A Popular Theory About Depression Wasn’t “Debunked” by a New Review
The title is a bit deceptive – at least more so than the link which adds “it got debunked years ago”. Ah, the techniques of clickbait!
Anyway, the title could rightfully say:
A Still-Popular But Unproven Old Theory About Depression Wasn’t “Debunked” By A New Review – It Was Simply Confirmed To STILL Be Unsupported By The Data, Despite Being Pushed For Decades By Doctors And Big Pharma Who KNEW It Wasn’t True
Please click the link if you want all the details, but my proposed title says it all. People kept using the theory as a sales and prescription gimmick. Big Pharma “suggested” the theory to doctors, and doctors “suggested” the theory to patients, to get them to take a kind of drug that patients are sometimes very resistant to taking.
Remember – antidepressants do, in fact, work for many patients – particularly for very serious cases of depression. Many people who in the past had to be hospitalized, can now live happy, functional lives in society because of these drugs.
It’s understandable that doctors try to convince patients to take the drugs they think will work to treat their problems.
But should your kids be getting antidepressants because of “school trouble”?
A whole ‘nuther question.
Because THAT is the end result of the little white lie that “people can have an imbalance that needs these drugs.”
We NORMALIZED antidepressents by NORMALIZING an ABNORMALITY that didn’t even exist.
ANYWAY – if the very fact that a WRONG THEORY has been KNOWINGLY spoon-fed to you by “the experts” for DECADES, is not giving you ideas about “climate change” – particularly in the post-COVID world…..
BUT WAIT.
Not quite yet. We have ANOTHER scandal to look at, first.
II. It’s Bush’s Beta Amyloid’s Fault!
This scandal is at the opposite end of the spectrum, from the above one, in which an entire industry and all of medicine KNOWINGLY told a little white lie to the public.
In this case, ONE SCIENTIST tipped the scales inappropriately, sending the entire world, including the rest of science, on a wild goose chase.
The LIE was only caught after years, and almost accidentally.
This is a rather long and interesting story, and I’m not going to recount it all here. But I will give you links and extensive quotes. It’s FASCINATING.
One of the best quick summaries is in, of all places, The Daily Kos.
Last month, drug company Genentech reported on the first clinical trials of the drug crenezumab, a drug targeting amyloid proteins that form sticky plaques in the brains of Alzheimer’s disease patients. The drug had been particularly effective in animal models, and the trial results were eagerly awaited as one of the most promising treatments in years. It did not work. “Crenezumab did not slow or prevent cognitive decline” in people with a predisposition toward Alzheimer’s.
Last year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) narrowly approved the use of Aduhelm, a new drug from Biogen that the company has priced so highly that it’s expected to drive up the price of Medicare for everyone in America, even those who never need this drug. Aduhelm was the first drug to be approved that fights the accumulation of those “amyloid plaques” in the brain. What makes the approval of the $56,000-a-dose drug so controversial is that while it does decrease plaques, it doesn’t actually slow Alzheimer’s. In fact, clinical trials were suspended in 2019 after the treatment showed “no clinical benefits.” (Which did not keep Biogen from seeking the drug’s approval or pricing it astronomically.)
Over the last two decades, Alzheimer’s drugs have been notable mostly for having a 99% failure rate in human trials. It’s not unusual for drugs that are effective in vitro and in animal models to turn out to be less than successful when used in humans, but Alzheimer’s has a record that makes the batting average in other areas look like Hall of Fame material.
And now we have a good idea of why. Because it looks like the original paper that established the amyloid plaque model as the foundation of Alzheimer’s research over the last 16 years might not just be wrong, but a deliberate fraud.
This story is fantastic, and so I recommend starting with the above Daily Kos article.
Before going into more detail, let me begin to give you my perspective on Alzheimer’s drugs.
I’ve watched a lot of drug classes accumulate new and improved drugs over nearly half a century of interest in the topic, but the TWO categories that have stood out to ME as the WORST in terms of success have been antivirals and Alzheimer’s drugs.
Antivirals first.
As you have seen over the last two and a half years, antivirals are not impossible to find, and while they don’t work 100% of the time, they’re still sometimes VERY helpful.
What has been more shocking to me is that it’s clear that the pharmaceutical industry frequently and reliably OPPOSES successful antivirals, when they can’t make money off them. The industry wants NEW antivirals they can patent, and they are willing to DEFAME and DENY old antivirals, even SUPERIOR and SAFER antivirals, just to create a market for new ones.
New antivirals that may be CRAP, and dangerous as hell. And they will even LIE to the Commander In Chief about them.
But set the antivirals aside for now, knowing that the situation is corrupt.
Anti-Alzheimer’s drugs are even worse, because THEY JUST DON’T WORK. They’re notorious for not actually working. They’ve never worked. In desperation, the FDA occasionally approves these worthless drugs, if only for investigation, but they are “mercy punts”. The drugs get approved, as long as they don’t show too many side effects, because they are “better than nothing”. But that’s it.
The drugs out there for dementia, senility and Alzheimer’s are WORTHLESS.
A LOT of people thought this was suspicious. I was one of them. Every once in a while, when researchers would reveal just how BAD the next drug actually was – how terrible and limited the results were – I would “go back to my mental drawing board” and ask the question:
“Why don’t these drugs work? Maybe the theory behind them is wrong. What could the truth possibly be?”
HA! I had no idea! No clue!
NOBODY – and I mean nobody – suspected that it was because of FRAUD.
At least, not until recently.
So let’s move on to the fraud in more detail. SCIENCE MAGAZINE.
I am including a long segment which is just the beginning of the article. Please note an important point – the investigator was actually looking at a DIFFERENT fraud in the same field of Alzheimer’s research, when he found this one.
BLOTS ON A FIELD?
A neuroscience image sleuth finds signs of fabrication in scores of Alzheimer’s articles, threatening a reigning theory of the disease
In August 2021, Matthew Schrag, a neuroscientist and physician at Vanderbilt University, got a call that would plunge him into a maelstrom of possible scientific misconduct. A colleague wanted to connect him with an attorney investigating an experimental drug for Alzheimer’s disease called Simufilam. The drug’s developer, Cassava Sciences, claimed it improved cognition, partly by repairing a protein that can block sticky brain deposits of the protein amyloid beta (Aβ), a hallmark of Alzheimer’s. The attorney’s clients—two prominent neuroscientists who are also short sellers who profit if the company’s stock falls—believed some research related to Simufilam may have been “fraudulent,” according to a petition later filed on their behalf with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Schrag, 37, a softspoken, nonchalantly rumpled junior professor, had already gained some notoriety by publicly criticizing the controversial FDA approval of the anti-Aβ drug Aduhelm. His own research also contradicted some of Cassava’s claims. He feared volunteers in ongoing Simufilam trials faced risks of side effects with no chance of benefit.
So he applied his technical and medical knowledge to interrogate published images about the drug and its underlying science—for which the attorney paid him $18,000. He identified apparently altered or duplicated images in dozens of journal articles. The attorney reported many of the discoveries in the FDA petition, and Schrag sent all of them to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which had invested tens of millions of dollars in the work. (Cassava denies any misconduct [see sidebar, below].)
But Schrag’s sleuthing drew him into a different episode of possible misconduct, leading to findings that threaten one of the most cited Alzheimer’s studies of this century and numerous related experiments.
The first author of that influential study, published in Nature in 2006, was an ascending neuroscientist: Sylvain Lesné of the University of Minnesota (UMN), Twin Cities. His work underpins a key element of the dominant yet controversial amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimer’s, which holds that Aβ clumps, known as plaques, in brain tissue are a primary cause of the devastating illness, which afflicts tens of millions globally. In what looked like a smoking gun for the theory and a lead to possible therapies, Lesné and his colleagues discovered an Aβ subtype and seemed to prove it caused dementia in rats. If Schrag’s doubts are correct, Lesné’s findings were an elaborate mirage.
Schrag, who had not publicly revealed his role as a whistleblower until this article, avoids the word “fraud” in his critiques of Lesné’s work and the Cassava-related studies and does not claim to have proved misconduct. That would require access to original, complete, unpublished images and in some cases raw numerical data. “I focus on what we can see in the published images, and describe them as red flags, not final conclusions,” he says. “The data should speak for itself.”
A 6-month investigation by Science provided strong support for Schrag’s suspicions and raised questions about Lesné’s research. A leading independent image analyst and several top Alzheimer’s researchers—including George Perry of the University of Texas, San Antonio, and John Forsayeth of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)—reviewed most of Schrag’s findings at Science’s request. They concurred with his overall conclusions, which cast doubt on hundreds of images, including more than 70 in Lesné’s papers. Some look like “shockingly blatant” examples of image tampering, says Donna Wilcock, an Alzheimer’s expert at the University of Kentucky.
The authors “appeared to have composed figures by piecing together parts of photos from different experiments,” says Elisabeth Bik, a molecular biologist and well-known forensic image consultant. “The obtained experimental results might not have been the desired results, and that data might have been changed to … better fit a hypothesis.”
Early this year, Schrag raised his doubts with NIH and journals including Nature; two, including Nature last week, have published expressions of concern about papers by Lesné. Schrag’s work, done independently of Vanderbilt and its medical center, implies millions of federal dollars may have been misspent on the research—and much more on related efforts. Some Alzheimer’s experts now suspect Lesné’s studies have misdirected Alzheimer’s research for 16 years.
“The immediate, obvious damage is wasted NIH funding and wasted thinking in the field because people are using these results as a starting point for their own experiments,” says Stanford University neuroscientist Thomas Südhof, a Nobel laureate and expert on Alzheimer’s and related conditions.
Lesné did not respond to requests for comment. A UMN spokesperson says the university is reviewing complaints about his work.
To Schrag, the two disputed threads of Aβ research raise far-reaching questions about scientific integrity in the struggle to understand and cure Alzheimer’s. Some adherents of the amyloid hypothesis are too uncritical of work that seems to support it, he says. “Even if misconduct is rare, false ideas inserted into key nodes in our body of scientific knowledge can warp our understanding.”
This article goes deeply into the fraud. It’s a great detective story. It raises a whole bunch of tangential issues.
For starters, the fact that you are even hearing about this is because the investigator (Matthew Schrag) didn’t wait for NIH to do anything – particularly after it AWARDED MORE MONEY TO THE FRAUDSTER.
Yes – you got that right.
He [Lesné] became a leader of UMN’s neuroscience graduate program in 2020, and in May 2022, 4 months after Schrag delivered his concerns to NIH, Lesné received a coveted R01 grant from the agency, with up to 5 years of support. The NIH program officer for the grant, Austin Yang—a co-author on the 2006 Nature paper—declined to comment.
Notice how the “revolving door” nature of the science is on display. “Insiders” who are buddies with and coworkers of “outsiders”, give those outsiders the precious grants.
However, Schrag was not caught with his pants down by NIH “Comeyism” (failure to discipline friends). Schrag had also taken his evidence to Science magazine. SMART MOVE. But then, it appears that Schrag was raised by Mennonites, home-schooled, and in the military. Interesting.
More from the Science article:
IN HIS WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT to NIH about Lesné’s research, Schrag made its scope and stakes clear: “[This] dossier is a fraction of the anomalies easily visible on review of the publicly accessible data,” he wrote. The suspect work “not only represents a substantial investment in [NIH] research support, but has been cited … thousands of times and thus has the potential to mislead an entire field of research.”
The agency’s reply, which Schrag shared with Science, noted that complaints deemed credible will go to the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity (ORI) for review. That agency could then instruct grantee universities to investigate prior to a final ORI review, a process that can take years and remains confidential absent an official misconduct finding. To Science, NIH said it takes research misconduct seriously, but otherwise declined to comment.
See how that works? Seriously – you CANNOT trust NIH, any more than you can trust Anthony Fauci.
NOW – things are starting to get interesting as all this news is hitting the mainstream media.
Gil00 brought me a link, in which the most famous coworker of the fraudster, Karen Ashe, finally responded to inquiries. Meanwhile, the fraudster has remained silent publicly. NOTE that in Schrag’s investigation (see below), Ashe was found innocent. ONLY in papers working with Lesné, were any of Ashe’s papers ever found to contain fraudulent images. Ditto for other authors. Lesné was the nexus of the fraud.
BUT the problem WAS spotted long ago, and yet this knowledge never bubbled up to a level of effectiveness in mainstream science. An early French coworker of Lesné found his images suspect, and refused to work with him after that.
From the Science article:
Questions about Lesné’s work are not new. Cell biologist Denis Vivien, a senior scientist at Caen, co-authored five Lesné papers flagged by Schrag or Bik. Vivien defends the validity of those articles, but says he had reason to be wary of Lesné.
Toward the end of Lesné’s time in France, Vivien says they worked together on a paper for Nature Neuroscience involving Aβ. During final revisions, he saw immunostaining images—in which antibodies detect proteins in tissue samples—that Lesné had provided. They looked dubious to Vivien, and he asked other students to replicate the findings. Their efforts failed. Vivien says he confronted Lesné, who denied wrongdoing. Although Vivien lacked “irrefutable proof” of misconduct, he withdrew the paper before publication “to preserve my scientific integrity,” and broke off all contact with Lesné, he says. “We are never safe from a student who would like to deceive us and we must remain vigilant.”
Schrag spot checked papers by Vivien or Ashe without Lesné. He found no anomalies—suggesting Vivien and Ashe were innocent of misconduct.
SO – what does Karen Ashe have to say?
University of Minnesota scientist responds to fraud allegations in Alzheimer’s research
While defending results, U researcher said it is “devastating” that a colleague might have doctored images.
A senior University of Minnesota scientist said it is “devastating” that a colleague might have doctored images to prop up research, but she defended the authenticity of her groundbreaking work on the origins of Alzheimer’s disease.
Dr. Karen Ashe declined to comment about a U investigation into the veracity of studies led by Sylvain Lesné, a neuroscientist she hired and a rising star in the field of Alzheimer’s research. However, she criticized an article in Science magazine that raised concerns this week about Lesné, because she said it confused and exaggerated the effect the U’s work had on downstream drug development to treat Alzheimer’s-related dementia.
“Having worked for decades to understand the cause of Alzheimer disease, so that better treatments can be found for patients, it is devastating to discover that a co-worker may have misled me and the scientific community through the doctoring of images,” Ashe said in an e-mail Friday morning. “It is, however, additionally distressing to find that a major scientific journal has flagrantly misrepresented the implications of my work.”
I’m undecided about this lady. This is a bit of a tangent, but it may be significant.
I trust her to some extent, based on the fact that Schrag found Ashe’s work CLEAN when it was NOT associated with Lesné. In my opinion she’s innocent.
AND YET, Ashe’s background is PERFECT for a two-stepper ChiCom, potentially brought to America as the child of secret socialist sleepers. [NOTE: “Two-steppers” are basically bi-generational spy families, with extreme cover used on the parents to throw off suspicions on the second generation as plants.] Ashe’s background – similar to that of the notorious Vindman twins, is also almost identical to several classic Chinese two-steppers in American media and politics, including relentless Trump character assassin, Weijia Jiang.
Video: Disenguous, pathetic stuff from @CBSNews's @Weijia Jiang, questioning the President's testing motives as suppressing them so as to tamp down case numbers and death tolls and then suggest he's playing politics with reopening state economies while Democratic governors aren't pic.twitter.com/acjiINrXxX
Video: @CBSNews's @Weijia Jiang came back for round two, bashing Trump for talking about testing like it's a "global competition" when so many are dying. Trump replies that she should ask China that question. So the media want Trump to ramp up testing, then hit him when he does?! pic.twitter.com/YYF13b3JrS
And don’t think this is just aimed at Karen Ashe – that I’m just blaming the innocent victim, which she may very well be. Let’s look at Sylvain Lesné. Let’s do a deep dive on the possibility that he was intentionally sabotaging science for more than just personal advancement.
This is just a theory to add to the pile of theories. But it’s a very intriguing theory, with enormous consequences, like – oh, say – “climate change”.
French communists, both agrarian and urban, are THICK in Normandy – where Sylvain Lesné grew up and went to university. The urban centers of Caen, Le Havre, and Rouen are communist strongholds.
You can see that Caen leans even further to the left than “worker’s paradise” Le Havre, where bleak Stalinist architecture rules. The vote against Le Pen was strong in Le Havre, but even stronger in Caen.
There is a reason why communism is persistent in Normandy. Not only is there a regional historical tradition of Jacobin thought – there was aggressive spread of Soviet-style communism to the area by Stalin, both before World War II and afterwards, in the devastation of the Allied liberation.
This was a significant part of the motivation for the Marshall plan – to not let the war feed Stalin’s slow but relentless ambitions, already at work in post-war France.
We already know that French “above-ground” communist Agnès Buzyn, who is weirdly allied with “conservative” Emmanuel Macron, was indicted for a plethora of COVID-19 “mistakes”, in which she seemed to aggressively “do the wrong thing” as COVID-19 began spreading into France.
We here in America are more familiar with one of these aggressive scientific mistakes – the “hiding” of hydroxychloroquine from the public by changing it from OTC to prescription only. (Please note that this “error” was at the bottom of the list, and is not even mentioned around the time of the indictment, which focused more on Buzyn’s downplaying of COVID dangers.)
Now – it’s very instructive to see how the French media (particularly the left-media, but all of it, really) has aggressively covered up for Buzyn on this point, with “fact-checking” in the Snopes style, where there are both clickbait strawmen and evasion on technicalities.
While the FORMAL reclassification of the drug HCQ from OTC to prescription occurred in January of 2020, which would make it seem more vindictive against Didier Raoult, and reactive against the treatment of the disease, that was merely the date of the effective reclassification.
The connection to Didier Raoult is a bit of a red herring, provided largely by his fan base. That is a typical irony useful to disinformation.
It turns out that the reclassification action itself took place in November of 2019. This point is then alleged by the fact-checkers to prove Buzyn’s “innocence”. As we now know, the deepest players in the COVID scam KNOWINGLY took many actions in September, October, and November of 2019.
Thus, in my opinion, these “fact checks” attempting to exonerate Buzyn’s scientific misconduct are in fact even more indicting, and indicative of her premeditated criminality.
Thus, if an analogous theory is correct, that Sylvain Lesné was intending to prop up bad science for more than just his own advancement, then there must be some VALUE in doing so.
Gil00 provided a possible answer to this – in thinking that perhaps there was an immunological connection to the scandal. THAT jumped out at me like a red flag. An immunity connection in Alzheimer’s is not only a known competitor of the beta amyloid theory – it fits in with my recent belief that the entire depopulation plot is connected to and being implemented through a very intentional and surreptitious set of actions leading to a decrease of individual human immunity, to make us EACH more vulnerable.
Thus, Lesné’s actions, which sent the majority of Alzheimer’s research down a primrose path to nowhere, may have been a DIVERSION away from the immunological origins of Alzheimer’s disease.
You know – an origin such as VACCINES.
Yes. Timing is everything.
NOW – even if Ashe and Lesné are completely innocent (and that would include brainwashing by communists), I think this is an EXCELLENT time to look at Alzheimer’s AGAIN, as a potential product of things like viruses and vaccines, which we KNOW can have neurological effects.
Yes. Vaccines which “go wrong” can affect the BRAIN through autoimmune actions.
Just sayin’.
III. Could Global Warming Concern in the Face of an Imminent Mini-Ice Age and an Incipient Full Ice Age Actually be Some Kind of Really Bad Science?
It should now be totally apparent that BAD SCIENCE on a global scale is not just possible – it’s EASY. This is without even bringing in the COVID debacle.
PLANET VULCAN, ANYONE?
You’ve seen it here in part I. BILLIONS of dollars have kept LIES alive and well in pharmaceutical science.
If it pays everybody to tell people there is a chemical imbalance that means they need a drug, it will be done, to sell the drug, or to tell the patient that there is hope. The bad information will be forwarded to doctors, and then to patients, to make those patients feel OK taking the drug. Eventually, it just becomes part of Fake Normal.
Consider (part II) that even a single author on a single scientific paper, followed by a few more images from that author on maybe a few dozen more papers, carrying subtle but convincing false evidence, can send BILLIONS of dollars, maybe tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, down a blind alley.
Not only that – the system will try to keep that money flowing in the same way, even when it is KNOWN by government bureaucrats to be based on faulty data.
Is it impossible that this kind of ERROR could extend to TRILLIONS of dollars?
I mean, who would actually WANT trillions of dollars?
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) were joined by Democratic lawmakers from both the House and Senate on February 7, 2019, to introduce Green New Deal legislation.
There is NOTHING in “anthropogenic global warming” or “climate change”, explained by the current theories, that cannot be explained equally well by the idea that a carbon dioxide prediction boondoggle (remember COVID models?) has occurred, as the result of BAD SCIENCE.
Indeed, the multiple and long-running FAILURES of the climate field would seem to this “poor” scientist to be rather similar to the FAILURES in anti-Alzheimer’s drugs. This kind of failure SHOULD point to severe theoretical problems in any NORMAL science situation, once freed from TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS of bad economic bets by politicians and financiers.
I remember – PERSONALLY – when we scientists were told by the leadership of the American Chemical Society that “anthropogenic global warming” was “settled science”. I knew MANY scientists in all branches of science – who were all SCIENTIFICALLY AFFECTED by this idea – who were still very actively debating the topic – and who like me were not convinced of AGW being real, true, or important, even if it did exist. The entire enterprise seemed HASTY and WRONG.
It seemed TOP-DOWN. It seemed IMPOSED. It seemed to contradict everything we knew about how science was supposed to operate – with major ideas normally taking YEARS if not DECADES of FIGHTING INSIDE SCIENCE to become crystal clear.
And OH YES – we had TIME.
SO – after reading about these two incidents of WRONG science being perpetuated by industry or academia, both knowingly and unknowingly, I do NOT think that “climate change” should be granted a pass.
I think the whole question of climate needs to “go back to the people”. That includes both SCIENTISTS who tell us WHAT IS FOUND, and THE PEOPLE who tell us WHAT MATTERS, once we find the truth.
Everybody else – the money, the media, the “leaders”, the shills, and the malevolent liars – need to get out of the way.
In particular, the MEDIA that pushes scientists’ opinions around with their “fake normal” and “fake science news” needs to STFU.
Don’t “trust the science”.
LET SCIENCE DISTRUST ITSELF.
And maybe, in fact definitely, YOU THE PEOPLE can help US, THE SCIENTISTS to DISTRUST SCIENCE……
I had already seen the video I’m about to show you, when I watched the press conference in which Florida Governor Ron DeSantis powerfully chastised the media for mischaracterizing his administration’s position of OPPOSING the mRNA vaccines for kids, as PROHIBITING the vaccines for kids – something which DeSantis reminded the idiot media that he cannot do.
However, DeSantis didn’t “hide” his opposition in the least. He still seemed to be doing everything in his power to get parents to look at Pfizer’s clinical trial data (or lack thereof) allegedly justifying this needless – if not counterproductive – if not downright dangerous vaccine.
Thus, when I saw how STRONGLY DeSantis held his ground, I thanked God that somebody in his administration surely saw the same video that I had seen.
YOU NEED TO SEE IT, TOO.
Just watch this. It’s short and to the point.
BOMBSHELL: Dr. Clare Craig Exposes How Pfizer Twisted Their Clinical Trial Data for Young Children
Gov. Ron DeSantis clarifies Florida's position on COVID shots for children, saying he's not surprised that the White House would lie and legacy media amplify it.
He adds countries with similar approaches to Florida "have been right on COVID way more than Fauci and his crew." pic.twitter.com/biRQf9Es2z
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) June 20, 2022
Twitter will try to remove this tweet from the historical record, so let’s just make a copy.
In my opinion, this Pfizer clinical trial is nearly 100% BAD SCIENCE.
That such bad science is not merely allowed to pass without comment by America’s major scientific organizations, such as the AMA and the ACS, but was in fact used by the FDA to approve utterly needless vaccines – this kind of failure of American science is SOUL-DEADENING.
It’s not just one person here or a research group there. This is multiplicity of large-group institutional failure.
Personally, I blame this shocking failure on the triumph of Chinese ethics over traditional Western ethics.
Pfizer, with its global HQ for clinical trial data in Wuhan (SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE!) is now allowing China and the CCP to effectively run all its clinical trials. This horrible, shoddy trial just REEKS of a sick combination of malignant Chinese battered anarcho-capitalism and corrupt Chinese communism. This is typical “top down” forcing of mistakes due to POLITICS and GREED.
I have been telling people that I will NEVER take another drug from Pfizer.
Day two of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland started off on a concerning note.
Some of the chief architects of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores met during a session called “Global ESG for Global Resilience,” and have clearly decided to double down on their objective for a new global economic order that transcends national borders and replaces free-market capitalism.
Destroying free-market capitalism in favor of a new “stakeholder” model, in which global elites hold all the power, has been their objective for years. A single ESG system gets them much closer to this goal, and will be significantly more effective at eroding national sovereignty, circumventing democratic processes, coercing companies into compliance, and ultimately restricting individual choice.
Early in the session, Hong Kong Stock Exchange Chairman Laura Cha got right to the point. She revealed, “To make ESG disclosures meaningful, we need to have a harmonized standard… It would be very good in terms of the work that the ISSB (the International Sustainability Standards Board) is doing to bring about standardized global measures.”
Don’t look at me to go “nervous Nellie” on this – or to ignore it.
DO NOT think for a second that we are going alarmist, Eeyore, despondent, or defeatist on this. OH NO.
We’re going to beat the SHIT out of ESG, and every WOKE will go BROKE as they cry over their own self-destruction.
We have SLAIN the CRT dragon, to the point that “they” of all stripes are already crying over that little dying monster.
WE *WILL* defeat ESG.
And we will have a good time doing it.
We already have a great head start on this.
ANDREW TORBA was way ahead on this stuff with his “parallel economy” thinking. His contention is that our best fight is to simply REPLACE the dying, suicidal, elite-controlled, leftard economy.
EMERALD ROBINSON was also way ahead on the solution, with her thinking that RELIGION / CULTURE / POLITICS are LINKED IN A STREAM, and that religion is upstream of all the “issues” of contention.
Combining these two ideas leads straight to a TRANSFORMATION of ESG into RCF, and RCF is a PARALLEL way for us to judge, criticize, reject, and not be part of THEIR religious, cultural, political, and economic suicide.
Let me explain.
Environmental —> Religious
We all know that “climate change” (formerly “global warming”) is part of the left’s insane, misdirected, knee-jerk, corrupt, herd-like, virtue-signal-filled version of environmentalism, which largely serves to enrich virtue-signaling elites, destroy America and develop China. Every “mistake” that leftist environmentalism makes (see masks in the ocean, dead eagles, coal plants in China) is excused, as it answers to nobody while ACTUALLY destroying the environment through insane policies which cause unplanned consequences in unpredictable places. Compliant companies, governments, and even individuals do things that make no sense, and push compliant science to say it knows things for certain, when it does NOT know them, largely for “woke cartel” profiteering.
This is where the right to debate man’s place in this universe has been stripped away from the people themselves, and given to self-serving elites, via their lapdog “experts” who are willing to embrace financially predetermined policies.
ESG may seem that it only allows “them” (globalist elites) to do what they have already been doing for years, but the trick is that it allows them to do it PUBLICLY and without the slightest guilt. It gives shocking legitimacy to political, cultural and religious discrimination in finance.
Environmentalism as practiced “religiously” by the left, is basically a way to allow an anti-human religion to take hold and control humanity, which is deemed “environmentally sinful”.
Environmentalism, by the left’s standards, IS the secular left’s religion.
To counter it, we need to remember what the Boy Scouts always thought was important – RELIGION. Real religion. Real, time-tested, CONSERVED, religion.
To COUNTER the left, we need to evaluate companies, governments, organizations, and even individuals of the left on their RELIGIOUS values, actions, and record.
Will there be screaming?
YES. And it will be music to our ears.
One of the great advantages of going full-bore to RELIGION in “rating” the left in opposition to “environmental”, is that it will not only spotlight the horrible record of woke Christianity and Judaism – it will directly attack Hollywood and the woke, mass-shooter-producing gaming industry with the very thing they THOUGHT they had run out of town in the 1970s – the moral guidance of the Catholic Church and Orthodox Judaism. By having a certain amount of moral control over movies, “decency standards” were able to rein in some of Hollywood’s worst behavior. Sadly, the Soviet Union and cultural Marxists in the United States destroyed any morality control in Hollywood, by MOCKING decency controls.
Too bad for them. We bring it back under OUR CONTROL this time.
Our TRUE religion, applied as ratings, will leave their weak and worthless environmental religion where it belongs – in the dustbin of history.
Social —> Cultural
When the leftists and the globalists say “social”, it really means SOCIALIST. This is where ESG basically says “we will discriminate based on politics”.
This is absolute bullshit. To counter it, we flip THEIR word for our word – the one used over and over by Steve Bannon as being “upstream of politics”. That word is CULTURAL.
CULTURAL includes both the “social” and the “individual”, because a good and decent culture can and should RESPECT the individual as a critical part of building a healthy society.
This one is pretty easy, and VERY powerful. This is where we FIGHT BACK against cultural Marxism. If it is detrimental to our CULTURE, our SOCIETY, our NATION, and our PEOPLE, including INDIVIDUALS regardless of race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, etc., then it is CULTURALLY NEGATIVE.
That doesn’t mean that when “groups” step out of line, culturally, they get a pass.
Black is fine. BLACK LIVES MATTER RIOTING and RACE-HOAXING are culturally rotten.
Jewish is fine. ANTI-CHRISTIAN machinations (CRT, ESG, SEL, hoaxes) are culturally rotten.
White is fine. Actual, real, WHITE SUPREMACY and NAZISM are culturally rotten.
See? This is easy. It’s like falling off a log.
Trump and MAGA do “high cultural rating” in their SLEEP.
Is “culture-rating” going to make the radical left and the globalists cry? Get ready for tasty, salty, liberal tears on globalist ice.
Governance —> Freedom
This is a DIRECT counterattack on the idea that “governance” (more like meddling) is what is needed.
Where THEY will rank things low on “governance”, WE will rank highly on FREEDOM.
This allows us to ENCOURAGE FREEDOM in every place where the left claims somebody has a low governance score.
We will MOCK the left’s ESG when we counter it – eventually allowing low ESG scores to be a BADGE OF HONOR – backed up by high RCF scores.
And we can grow the idea of “freedom” scoring well beyond their “governance” boundaries, because YEAH, WE’RE FREE TO DO IT.
See how great it is to NOT be constrained by their thinking, by merely DEFENDING?
Going on OFFENSE in COUNTERATTACK has its advantages.
We will come up with scoring that makes the conniving, scheming, globalist SCUM have a BAD DAY EVERY DAY.
TL;DR –
THEY want to politicize finance?
WE will do it even better, even bigger, and when we do…..
We are NOT serving mercurials or arsenicals today – or EVER – but we ARE serving MODERN SUBSTITUTES like penicillin – to the non-allergic, of course.
While our beloved REAL bartender takes a needed break of unknown duration, we continue to ENDEAVOR TO PERSEVERE.
Christmas Spirit
And now, the rules of the pub.
HOUSE RULES
God bless us, every one! Tiny Tim had such a beautiful soul. He hadn’t a mean bone in his body…unlike most of us. But in keeping with Christmas, we promise to honor Wolf’s rules and keep Scrooge at bay. The Utree is where the Ghost of Christmas Present will conduct you should you need to rattle some chains. Another option, should all hell break loose is here.
Now, back to business.
AMEN!
Free the January Brothers
Current Art On The Wall
We have a really RETRO shipment this week. All designed to go along with our FEATURE PRESENTATION.
These are presented in the order that they came out of the box.
PATENT MEDICINE PILL, 1890.
Advertisement for Beecham’s Pills from an American newspaper of 1890.
Interestingly, Beecham’s Pills were actually USEFUL. They contained aloe, ginger, and SOAP, the latter meaning that they were much like stool softeners – a gentle laxative.
Not so sure about snake oil…..
The following is a subtle ad for CHILD DEWORMERS.
With this picture, we begin some ads for Dr. D. Jayne and his products. His company lasted for around a century. He was an actual trained doctor, and tended to use pharmaceuticals with real physical effects, like digitalis, opiates, etc., rather than quack ingredients.
American children tended to have roundworms and pinworms – Dr. Jayne’s “vermifuge” apparently worked on both.
Jayne used a lot of artwork in his marketing – thus many of his product advertisements can still be found.
The following is very subtle propaganda.
Jayne’s was still around as WWII loomed. Many of our childhoods were not long after this. Bear this in mind later in this post.
More “Jayne’s art”.
The expectorant apparently contained ipecac, opium and digitalis.
Nothing like a good salve!
Stabler’s apothecary was run by multiple generations of a family of pharmacists. The founder, Edward, was an interesting herbalist, trained in Pennsylvania. He was an abolitionist in Virginia who would purchase slaves to set them free. http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2006/feb/01/herbal-remedy/
I hope you have some idea now about medicine in the 19th century.
Do you think we’ve advanced much?
Let’s move “forward” now, to “state of the art” 19th century prescription medicine.
Seatbelts.
Mercury and Arsenic as the mRNA and Remdesivir of Pre-Fauci America
In the process of reading about how COVID vaccines are now setting off syphilis tests (a topic which we covered last Friday), I chanced upon a boatload of information about early treatments of syphilis, and what I read simply blew me away.
The scandals of syphilis are WAY, WAY more than the “shame of the disease itself”, and WAY, WAY more than the Tuskegee syphilis experiment.
These scandals are SMALL POTATOES compared to the scandal of TREATMENT OF SYPHILIS WITH MERCURY.
This is history you will NOT learn under globalists and progressives.
A scandal which was SO BAD – just like “treatment” with these demonic mRNA vaccines – that medicine started QUIETLY – without admitting fault – looking for an exit strategy. And part of that was motivated by this fact:
BLACKS and other groups who were not getting “treated” with mercury, were not suffering many of the WORST end-stage “symptoms of syphilis”.
You see what I mean? It was JUST LIKE THE CLOT SHOT. Just like remdesivir. BLAMECASTING the errors of the BAD but moneymaker treatments onto the disease.
This is NOT NEW STUFF.
In fact, it is MOST IRONIC that the Tuskegee experiment STARTED OFF by literally SAVING the participants from treatment with mercury – only to then DENY THEM penicillin when that became available, so that they could continue the experiment.
Because the experiment was not merely about “not treating people”.
It was REALLY about NOT TREATING PEOPLE WITH MERCURY.
And THIS explains why there was so much determination to get these participants to the end-stage WITHOUT TREATMENT. Because it was end-stage effects that they were so interested in observing.
What I discovered was that the history of medicine in America is FILLED with stuff every bit as bad as the DEMON Anthony Fauci, the disaster of AIDS and AZT, toxic drugs like remdesivir, and medical killers like the untested mRNA vaccines. Much of it is exposed by the history of syphilis, so that is where we will begin.
The Wikipedia article on syphilis doesn’t say much about the actual treatment of syphilis with mercury, despite it having a fairly extensive section on treatment. A much better coverage is found in the article on the History of syphilis.
However, even THAT does not really give you a sense of the magnitude of what might gently be called “the problem of mercury as a medicine”.
Let me put it this way. When it turned out that MALARIA and ARSENIC were both superior and more importantly SAFER treatments of syphilis relative to the “consensus treatment” of MERCURY, you know that mercury was BAD SHIT as a medicine.
Obviously, if they tried MALARIA and ARSENIC, people KNEW that mercury was a bad drug.
In fact, I was shocked to find that the current confrontation between “natural therapies” and “pharmaceuticals” is a VERY old conflict that never went away. While there has been SOME reduction in the mortality difference between “do no harm, save a few” natural remedies and “kill a bunch of people, save a few” pharmaceuticals, we are still talking about millions of Americans killed by pharmaceuticals intended – or maybe just “purported” – to save them.
Anyway, here is the big picture.
The “clot shot” and the people who maliciously pushed it are entirely believable in the long, dark shadow of “killer calomel”.
SO – let’s get started with Hg2Cl2.
My parents actually had a bottle of calomel (not calamine – the neighbor kids had that) in the medicine cabinet when I was a kid. It was somewhat more modern than the above, with a metal screw-cap. Indeed, my parents had a lot of very old-school medical stuff from the 40s and 50s.
As children, we treated all our wounds with the mercury compound thiomersal, a.k.a. merthiolate. You know – the bad stuff in vaccines. This is the “new” bottle which I loved – we had older glass bottles with a glass dipping rod, before these handy squeeze bottles.
Calomel has a LONG history as a therapeutic. Although it got its start back in alchemy, by the time it got to America, it was a common medicine.
From Wikipedia:
By the 19th century, calomel was viewed as a panacea, or miracle drug, and was used against almost every disease, including syphilis, bronchitis, cholera, ingrown toenails, teething, gout, tuberculosis, influenza, and cancer. During the 18th and early 19th centuries pharmacists used it sparingly; but by the late 1840s, it was being prescribed in heroic doses[7]—due in part to the research of Benjamin Rush, who coined the term “heroic dose” to mean about 20 grains taken four times daily.[8] This stance was supported by Dr. Samuel Cartwright, who believed that large doses were “gentlest” on the body.[9] As calomel rose in popularity, more research was done into how it worked.
J. Annesley was one of the first to write about the differering effects of calomel when taken in small or large doses.[9] Through experimentation on dogs, Annesley concluded that calomel acted more like a laxative on the whole body rather than acting specifically on the vascular system or liver as previous physicians believed.[9] In 1853, Samuel Jackson described the harmful effects of calomel on children in his publication for Transactions of Physicians of Philadelphia.[7] He noted that calomel had harmful effects causing gangrene on the skin, loss of teeth, and deterioration of the gums.[7] On May 4, 1863, William A. Hammond, the United States’ Surgeon-General, stated that calomel would no longer be used in the army as it was being abused by soldiers and physicians alike.[7] This caused much debate in the medical field, and eventually led to his removal as Surgeon-General.[10] Calomel continued to be used well into the 1890s and even into the early 20th century.[7] Eventually calomel’s popularity began to wane as more research was done, and scientists discovered that the mercury in the compound was poisoning patients.
Calomel was the main of the three components of the pill number 9 of the British army during the First World War. [11]
But if you REALLY want to understand the history of calomel as both a poison and a drug, this is the article you need to read.
This article totally gets it, as you can tell from the opening quote.
New drugs present greater hazards as well as greater potential benefits than ever before—for they are widely used, they are often very potent, and they are promoted by aggressive sales campaigns that may tend to overstate their merits and fail to indicate the risks involved in their use. . . There is no way of measuring the needless suffering, the money innocently squandered, and the protraction of illnesses resulting from the use of such ineffective drugs.
John F. Kennedy, in his Consumers’ Protection Message of March 15, 19621
Is the whole “Q” thing starting to make sense? Just as an aside. JFK clearly had some of the same enemies as Trump.
Anyway, this article shows how the use of mercury and arsenic compounds for medicines was controversial even from the START, with Paracelsus himself admonishing fellow alchemists not to use too much mercury in treatments.
The problem with calomel is that it’s insoluble MOST of the time, and in that state it can be used in excess, because it just flushes through the body. It’s a lot like barium sulfate – a totally safe version of highly toxic barium – in that respect. But if calomel oxidizes, or becomes impure, or otherwise emits other forms of mercury, it can be very harmful.
Thus, calomel got good results in some hands, but in the hands of other physicians, and in the bodies of other patients, it was a killer. It was easily abused, and even some of the “megadose” treatments were abusive from the git-go – to say nothing of giving it to children, and doing life-long damage.
But now, let’s look at what calomel and other mercury compounds did for syphilis. For THAT we go to another great article.
This article does a deep dive on use of mercury to treat syphilis, and does not hold back on the contention that much of the symptomology of syphilis that was seen before penicillin, was really due to mercury poisoning and NOT due to syphilis itself.
Sound familiar?
This article in particular contends that the end-stage dementia of tertiary syphilis in the West, which was observed much less frequently in certain populations like blacks, Indians, and Norwegians, who avoided mercury, was mostly due to the treatment with mercury, not syphilis.
In case you’re thinking that’s unlikely, just consider patient-killing remdesivir, which we’ve covered extensively.
Now, there IS an great academic look at the skeletons of syphilitic patients, some of whom were treated with mercury, trying to determine if mercury made things worse. The results are inconclusive, but in any case, the background material is excellent reading.
More Harm than Healing? Investigating the Iatrogenic Effects of Mercury Treatment on Acquired Syphilis in Post-medieval London.
Molly K. Zuckerman
DOI 10.1515/opar-2016-0003 Received October 26, 2015; accepted March 29, 2016
Abstract: Mercury was commonly used to treat syphilis in post-medieval Europe, but debate persists about whether it ameliorated infection or exacerbated it. As there are no in vitro studies on mercury’s effectiveness, Hg levels were characterized using an established technique, portable X-Ray Florescence Spectrometry (pXRF) in syphilitic skeletons (N=22) from six post-medieval London cemeteries. Levels were assessed against proxies for syphilitic infection severity (lesion type, episodic involvement, extent of involvement), oral health indicators, and age at death. The findings are equivocal, likely obfuscated by background poor oral health and high mortality, and cannot elucidate whether mercury ‘killed or cured’.
Keywords: syphilis, mercury, pXRF, post-medieval, London, trace element analysis, paleopathology.
The history of treatment with mercury in America serves as a strong precedent for what we are seeing now with “vaccines for everything”. The mendacity of some and the fecklessness of others regarding COVID treatments is not new – it all happened before with the mendacious and feckless medical establishment – and MERCURY.
And just for my fellow lovers of history-of-science porn, click on the following for the full-sized image.
From Wikipedia.
L0057102 Mahogany medicine chest, England, 1801-1900
Credit: Science Museum, London. Wellcome Images
images@wellcome.ac.uk
http://wellcomeimages.org
The mahogany medicine chest contains boxes, bottles and tubes of medications to treat a number of conditions. The chest includes treatments to purge the body by vomiting (emetics), by sweating (diaphoretics), as well as general purgatives such as rhubarb, jalap and calomel. Other medications include pain relief, such as opium plus astringents and stimulants, including ginger and lavender. The chest contains a handwritten inventory listing the medications. The chest also includes a set of scales, weights, a pill tile and a spatula. The set was probably used in the home or by a chemist or apothecary.
maker: Unknown maker
Place made: England, United Kingdom
made: 1801-1900 Published: –
Copyrighted work available under Creative Commons Attribution only licence CC BY 4.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
And don’t forget to…….
ENJOY THE SHOW.
Thank you all for being here. Have a great weekend.
Trudeau is threatening to confiscate bank accounts. Steve Cortez and others has been warning of coming Stagflation. Steve has been a part of Wall Street as a trader and strategist for almost two decades. Others such as Clif High warn of a coming dollar collapse.
Ed Dowd, a former Blackrock Portfolio Manager, reports on Falling Pharma Stocks And Coming Financial Collapse. Edward has said elsewhere how COVID-19 may have been used to cover global debt, and how he predicts a financial collapse is ahead of us.
… the bilateral currency swap agreement on 22 March 2012. The agreement allows exchange of local currencies between the two central banks…’” thus cutting out the US Dollar as the exchange currency.
The China-Australia Currency Swap Agreement.
Given these circumstances, I thought a discussion about Central Banks and the US dollar was appropriate. I hoped the Q tree could benefit from having this information all in one place.
“Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation — these bear lightly on the happiness of the mass of the community compared with fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. Our own history has recorded for our instruction enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice, and the intolerable oppression, on the virtuous and well disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way countenanced by government.”
Daniel Webster (1782 -1852) Statement to the Senate in 1832
With encouragement from Senators Clay and Daniel Webster, Mr Nicholas Biddle, then President of the Second Bank of the United States, applied for a renewal of the Bank’s charter in 1832. President Jackson vetoed the renewal, stating “. . . It appears that more than a fourth part of the stock is held by foreigners and the residue is held by a few hundred of our citizens, chiefly of the richest class. . .” LINK
So it should not surprising that Senator Aldrich (R) read that Webster quote at a New York City dinner speech on October 15, 1913 on the eve of the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. He was NOT advocating AGAINST a Fractional Reserve Currency but rather FOR IT! — SEE: aIV Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science #1, at 38 (Columbia University, New York (1914))
For those who might not know the history of Fractional Reserve Banking see: The Magic of Fractional Banking. In essence it is counterfeiting.
One of the biggest victories achieved by modern economists and modern central bankers is changing the definition of inflation. Inflation used to mean an increase in the money supply – full stop.
Money is metal coins, currency (Bank IOUs) and credit (fairy dust created out of thin air) or even beads and obsidian arrowheads. Money needs to be durable, accepted and dividable which is why precious metals were often the choice.
Money is a generally accepted, recognized, and centralized medium of exchange in an economy that is used to facilitate transactional trade for goods and services.
Capitalism is a private individual’s wealth, labor and resources reinvested to produce more wealth.
Capitalism is an economic system in which capital goods are owned by private individuals or businesses. The production of goods and services is based on supply and demand in the general market.
E.M. Smith aka Chiefio, who trained as an economist, gets into the definition of capitalism and other definitions surrounding capitalism: Monopoly, Monopsony, Oligopoly, Collusion And Economics 1“Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism” is a short comment by EM describing the continuum between straight capitalism and Communism.
One of the best explanations of the Federal Reserve is by G Edward Griffin. A Talk by G. Edward Griffin-The Creature from Jekyll Island. Unfortunately Griffin is a member of the John Birch Society and is therefore attacked on that basis by the defenders of the Fed. So I am presenting more rigorous sources.
Some of the most frank evidence on banking practices was given by Graham F. Towers, Governor of the Central Bank of Canada (from 1934 to 1955), before the Canadian Government’s Committee on Banking and Commerce, in 1939… Most of the evidence quoted was the result of interrogation by Mr. “Gerry” McGeer, K.C., a former mayor of Vancouver, who clearly understood the essentials of central banking. Here are a few excerpts:
Q. But there is no question about it that banks create the medium of exchange? Mr. Towers: That is right. That is what they are for… That is the Banking business, just in the same way that a steel plant makes steel. (p. 287) The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all. (pp. 76 and 238) Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money. (pp. 113 and 238) Broadly speaking, all new money comes out of a Bank in the form of loans. As loans are debts, then under the present system all money is debt. (p. 459)
Q. When $1,000,000 worth of bonds is presented (by the government) to the bank, a million dollars of new money or the equivalent is created? Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. Is it a fact that a million dollars of new money is created? Mr. Towers: That is right.
Q. Now, the same thing holds true when the municipality or the province goes to the bank? Mr. Towers: Or an individual borrower.
Q. Or when a private person goes to a bank? Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. When I borrow $100 from the bank as a private citizen, the bank makes a bookkeeping entry, and there is a $100 increase in the deposits of that bank, in the total deposits of that bank? Mr. Towers: Yes. (p. 238)
Q. Mr. Towers, when you allow the merchant banking system to issue bank deposits which, with the practice of using the cheques as we have it in vogue today, constitutes the medium of exchange upon which I think 95 per cent of our public and private business is transacted, you virtually allow the banks to issue an effective substitute for money, do you not? Mr. Towers: The bank deposits are actual money in that sense, yes.
Q. In that sense they are actual money, but, as a matter of fact, they are not actual money but credit, bookkeeping accounts, which are used as a substitute for money? Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. Then we authorize the banks to issue a substitute for money? Mr. Towers: Yes, I think that is a very fair statement of banking. (p. 285)
“Banks typically have 3% of their assets in cash in order to meet customer needs. Since 1960, banks have been allowed to use this “vault cash” to satisfy their reserve requirements. Today, bank reserve requirements have fallen to the point where they are now exceeded by vault cash, which means lowering reserve requirements to zero would have virtually no impact on the banking system. US banks are already operating free of any reserve constraints. The graph below shows reserve requirements falling to zero over the last fifty years….”
E.M. Smith and other economists, such as Steve Bannon and those he has on the War Room as well as other financial experts are trained (and believe in) Keynesian Economics (IMF.) I prefer Mises and have had arguments with E.M to that effect. (He has started to come around a bit.) It should be noted that Communist spy Harry Dexter Whiteof the US Treasury and Fabian Socialist John Maynard Keyne are the two who saddled the world with the IMF and World Bank via the 1944 Bretton Woods system. I mentioned recently Structural Adjustment Policies, the noose the IMF & World Bank Banksters put around the neck of countries that go bankrupt. There is another Economic Philosophy not connected to the Communists and Fabian Socialists. It was developed by Mises.
This is very long so I want to highlight a few critical points.
#1. Because money is not capital, he [Mises] concluded that an increase of the money supply confers no identifiable social value. If you fail to understand this point, you will not be able to understand the rest of Mises’s theory of money. On this assessment of the value of money, his whole theory of money hinges.
An increase in the quantity of money can no more increase the welfare of the members of a community, than a diminution of it can decrease their welfare. Regarded from this point of view, those goods that are employed as money are indeed what Adam Smith called them, “dead stock, which . . . produces nothing”
#2. New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people’s bank accounts or under their mattresses. [New] Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money.
It is these losses of the groups that are the last to be reached by the variation in the value of money which ultimately constitute the source of the profits made by the mine owners and the groups most closely connected with them
[This is a critical point and the reason Bankers can steal our wealth]
This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises’s monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game. Mises did not use this terminology, but he used the zero-sum concept. Because the free market always maximizes the utility of the existing money supply, changes in the money supply inescapably have the characteristic features of a zero-sum game. Some individuals are made better off by an increase in the money supply; others are made worse off. The existing money is an example of a “fixed pie of social value.” Adding to the money supply does not add to its value.
MISES ON GOLD
…the attempt by modern governments to regulate in any way an international gold standard is always a political ruse to undermine its anti-inflationary bias. “The international gold standard works without any action on the part of governments. It is effective real cooperation of all members of the world-embracing market community. . . . What governments call international monetary cooperation is concerted action for the sake of credit expansion”
“Now, the gold standard is not a game, but a social institution. Its working does not depend on the preparedness of any people to observe arbitrary rules. It is controlled by the operation of inexorable economic law” (p. 462)…..
. . . The role played by ingots in the gold reserves of the banks is a proof that the monetary standard consists in the precious metal, and not in the proclamation of the authorities (p. 67).
In order to effect the acceptance of fiat money or credit money, the State adopts a policy of the abolition of its previous contractual obligations. What was previously a legal right of full convertability into either gold or silver coins is abolished by a new law. The State removes the individual’s legal right to exchange the State’s paper notes for gold or silver coins. It then declares that the new, inconvertible fiat paper money or bank credit money is equal in value to the older redeemable notes, meaning equal to the value of the actual coins previously obtainable through redemption. But the free market determines otherwise. The two forms of money are not equal in value in the judgment of the market’s individual participants. Gresham’s law is still obeyed….
Gresham’s law
The State can set legal prices, meaning exchange ratios, between the various kinds of money. The effects of such fixed exchange rates are identical to the effects of any other kind of price control: gluts and shortages. The artificially overvalued money (glut) replaces the artificially undervalued money (shortage). This cause-and-effect relationship is called Gresham’s law.
MONEY:
Mises therefore defined money as the most marketable commodity. “It is the most marketable good which people accept because they want to offer it in later acts of impersonal exchange” (Human Action, p. 401.).
Money serves as a transmitter of value through time because certain goods serve as media of exchange.
Money transmits value, Mises taught, but money does not measure value. This distinction is fundamental in Mises’s theory of money.
Mises was adamant: there is no measure of economic value.
….Mises concluded that money is neither a consumption good nor a capital good. He argued that production and consumption are possible without money (p. 82). Money facilitates both production and consumption, but it is neither a production good nor a consumption good. Money is therefore a separate analytical category.
“It is illegitimate to compare the part played by money in production with that played by ships and railways. Money is obviously not a ‘commercial tool’ in the same sense as account books, exchange lists, the Stock Exchange, or the credit system”
Because money is not capital, he concluded that an increase of the money supply confers no identifiable social value. If you fail to understand this point, you will not be able to understand the rest of Mises’s theory of money. On this assessment of the value of money, his whole theory of money hinges….
This theory regarding the impact that changes in the money supply have on social value is the basis of everything that follows. Mises offered here a unique assessment of the demand for money. He implied here that an individual’s demand for production goods or consumption goods, when met by increased production, confers an increase in social value or social welfare.
If a producer benefits society by increasing the production of a non-monetary good, later finding a buyer, then society is benefitted because there are at least two winners and no losers.
Therefore, if a producer of gold and a buyer of gold both benefit from an exchange – which they do, or else they would not trade – yet society receives no social benefit, then the analyst has to conclude that some other members of society have been made, or will be made, worse off by the increase in the money supply. This analysis would also apply to decreases in the money supply.
There are two conceptually related issues here: (1) money as a separate analytical category, neither a consumption good nor a production good; (2) changes in the money supply as conveying neither an increase nor decrease in social value.
With that as a background in economics, we look at the Federal Reserve Bank through the eyes of Congressman Wright Patman (D) in 1964 before President Nixon had to close the gold window.
Again this is very long, which is why I have posted excerpts. However if you want to understand our Central Banking System this is a very good document to read.
President Lincoln said :
“Money is the creature of law, and the creation of the original issue of money should be maintained as an exclusive monopoly of the National Government. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of the Government, it is the Government’s greatest opportunity.” [pg 16]
This is very important. Although US citizens can not exchange Federal Reserve notes for treasury gold, official and semi official foreign banks can.
Behind the Federal Reserve notes is the credit of the U.S. Government. If you happen to have a $5, $10, or $20 Federal Reserve note, you will notice across the top of the bill a printed statement of the fact that the US government promises to pay not the Federal Reserve promises to pay. Nevertheless most Americans to do not understand what the US Government promises to pay: American citizens holding these notes cannot demand anything for them except (a) they can be exchanged for other Federal Reserve notes or (b) that they be accepted in payment of taxes and all debts public and private. Certain official or semiofficial foreign banks may exchange any “dollar credits” they may hold-that is, deposits with the commercial banks-for an equal amount of the Treasury’s gold. Americans themselves may not exchange them for gold . [pg 19]
Of the 19 Federal Reserve officials 12 are elected by bankers so HOW the money supply is increase and WHO gets the interest on the US treasury bonds can get very interesting.
The Federal Reserve officials can always decide to create a large portion of any increase in the money supply themselves, though, of course, a larger portion of the supply will always be provided by the private banks under present law. Still the larger portion of Reserve-created money, the more the U.S. Treasury benefits-because all income of the Federal Reserve after expenses reverts to the Treasury. Thus the Treasury receives a good share of the income earned from the Government securities purchased in Reserve money-creating operations.
On the other hand, if the Federal Reserve officials decide that the increase in the money supply they want is all, or substantially all, to be made by the private banks, the private banks acquire and hold more Government securities than in the first case, and the interest payments on these securities go into bank profits. So, whether the Federal Reserve officials decide to favor the U.S. Treasury or the private banks does make a difference-millions of dollars of difference-in the amount of taxes you, I, and all other taxpayers must pay. After all, one of the biggest items of expense of the Federal Government is the interest it must pay on its debt. [pg 36]
[JUMPING FORWARD IN TIME]
“…Although the money in the Federal Reserve is not in anyway “owned” by private banks they get paid interest on it…. In its latest power play, on October 3, 2008, the Fed acquired the ability to pay interest to its member banks on the reserves the banks maintain at the Fed. Reuters reported on October 3:”
“The U.S. Federal Reserve gained a key tactical tool from the $700 billion financial rescue package signed into law on Friday that will help it channel funds into parched credit markets. Tucked into the 451-page bill is a provision that lets the Fed pay interest on the reserves banks are required to hold at the central bank.”
[An incorrect but ] typical explanation runs this way: John Jones deposits $100 in cash with his bank. The bank is required to keep, say, 20 percent of its deposits in reserves, so the bank must deposit $20 of this $100 as reserves, with a Federal Reserve bank. The bank is free to use the other $80, however, to make loans to customers or invest in securities. The expansion of money thus begins. This kind of explanation not only leads to misunderstanding, it also leads to misguided Government policies and rather constant agitation on the part of bankers for other such policies. Many of the smaller bankers who are, on the whole, not as well versed with the mechanics of the money system as they might be, actually believe that they have deposited a portion of their money, or their depositors’ money, with the Federal Reserve. Thus they feel they are being denied the opportunity to make profitable use of this money. Accordingly, there is always agitation to have the Federal Reserve pay the banks interest on this money which they think they have “deposited” with the Federal Reserve.
Furthermore, they are quite certain that the Federal Reserve System has “used” their money to acquire the Government securities which the Federal Reserve may buy in the process of reserve creation. Believing this, the bankers naturally feel that they are entitled to some share of the tremendous profits which the System receives from interest payments on its Government securities. Many bankers know better. The leaders of the bankers’ associations certainly do. But some of these leaders have not hesitated to play on general ignorance and misunderstanding to mobilize the whole banking community behind drives that are nothing but attempts to raid the Public Treasury.
The truth is, however, that the Private banks, collectively, have deposited not a penny of their own funds, or their depositors funds, with the Federal Reserve banks. The impression that they do so arises from the fact that reserves, once created, can be, and are, transferred back and forth from one bank to another, as one bank gains deposits and another loses deposits. [pg 37]
Under Secretary of the Treasury Robert V. Roosa, formerly a Vice President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, while testifying before the House Committee on Banking and Currency in 1960, described the misconception as follows:
“There is another misconception which occurs much more frequently-that is, the banks think that they give us the reserves on which we operate and that, too, is a misconception. We encounter that frequently, and, as you know, we create those reserves under the authority that has been described here.”
The writer [Wright Patman] has had a couple of personal experiences which ‘have provided some amusing confirmation of the fact that the source of bank reserves is not deposits of cash by the member banks with the Federal Reserve banks. having seen reports that the Federal Reserve System had, on a given date, Government securities amounting to a proximately $28 billion, I went on one occasion to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York where these securities are supposed to be housed, and asked if I might be allowed to see them. The officials of this bank said, yes, they would be glad to show them to me; whereupon they opened the vaults and let me look at, and even hold in my hand, the large mound of Government securities which they claimed to have and which, in fact, they did have.
Since I had also seen reports that the member banks of the Federal Reserve System had a certain number of millions of dollars in “cash reserves” on deposit with the Federal Reserve bank, I then asked if I might be allowed to see these cash reserves. This time my question was met with some looks of surprise; the bank officials then patiently explained to me that there were no cash reserves. The cash, in truth, does not exist and never has existed. [pg 38]
When the Federal Reserve purchases a $1 million Government bond and gives some bank credit for $1 million in its reserve account, that bank also credits the bond dealer’s checking account with $1 million. I n other words, to acquire $1 million of reserves, the bank also assumes a liability to pay its customers $1 million. If the transactions stopped here, the bank would, of course, come out even, neither gaining anything nor losing anything. But the fact that there is now $1.million more of bank reserves than existed before means that the private banks as a group can create $6 million more money than existed before. In other words, by acquiring this $1 million more in bank reserves, the private banks have the privilege of creating another $6 million of bank deposits, in the process of which they acquire $6 million in interest-bearing securities or loan paper, less an allowance for leakage into the cash (currency) balances of the public. [pg 43]
What amount of Government securities have the private banks acquired with bank-created money?
On January 31, 1964, all commercial banks in this country owned $62.7 billion in U.S. Government securities. The banks have acquired these securities with bank-created money. In other words, the (banks have used the Federal Government’s power to create money without charge to lend $62.7 billion to the Government at interest.
On January 29, 1964, commercial banks had total assets amounting to $304.7 billion, and all of these had been paid for with bank-created money, except $25.4 billion which had been paid for with their stockholders’ capital. In other words, less than 10 percent of the banks’ assets have been acquired with money invested by stockholders in the banks. [pg 46]
The make-up of the Federal Reserve Directors changed in favor of the bankers
The Federal Open Market Committee. There are 19 participants in this powerful body, 7 appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate of the United States. Once appointed, however, a man serves for a period of 14 years, and cannot be removed by the President or by any other official body, except for cause. The other 12 men in this select group are elected to their places through the votes of private commercial bankers. there are 12 voting members of the Federal Open Market Committee. The voting members consist of 7 members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, plus some 5 of the 12 Federal Reserve bank residents. [pg 65]
Because of this, the balance of power over the money supply lay securely, it was thought, with the public side of the System through authority of the Board of Governors. But when the move toward the alternative open-market technique of control was given legislative blessing by Congress in 1933 and 1935 and a full-fledged central bank thereby created the balance shifted radically toward the private, commercial banking side of the System. [pg 72]
.
.
“ownership” of the fed reserve: Confusion due to stock and elected board members: The position of the Federal Reserve officials thus seems to be clear :
The Federa1 Reserve banks are not owned by the commercial banks. The viewpoint of the individuals quoted above has also been borne out by the presidents of the Federal Reserve banks in hearings before the House Banking and Currency Committee. However, officials of the Federal Reserve banks are sometimes inclined to take the opposite position. [pg 78]
Do bankers believe that they own the Federal Reserve banks. Yes. [100% of the “stock” is owned by the private banks. Also after instigating “the Accord” It was later revealed by testimony of some of the Federal Reserve officials to committees of Congress that the Open Market Committee had held a meeting on August 18 and decided not only to raise the discount rate, but to “go their own way” on the Government longer term bond rate as well, despite what the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the head of the Office of Defense Mobilization might do”….Therefore the Federal Reserve is not answerable to the President or Congress or the electorate, nor even to a government audit or even Congressional funding!]
The original act required that the banks invest 6 percent of their capital stock in the Federal Reserve banks.
Why was the Federal Reserve Act written to require member banks to invest in the so-called stock of the Federal Reserve banks?
The framers of the Federal Reserve Act gave many reasons, but the main, reason was this: it was expected that the Federal Reserve would issue money, not mainly against Government securities as is now the practice, but against commercial and industrial loan paper-“eligible paper” as the reader knows.
It was in view of these considerations that Congress, in framing the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, required member banks of the Federal Reserve System to put a certain percentage of their capital into the .’stock” of the Federal Reserve banks; this “stock” was a safeguard against a misuse of the Government’s credit which was being delegated to these banks. The 1013 act placed on the member banks, furthermore, a “double liability” for their “stock” in the Federal Reserve banks. In other words, if a Federal Reserve bank failed, the member banks would lose not only their invested capital, but an equal amount of capital which they would also forfeit. [pg 79]
The 1933 act also prohibited commercial banks from making stock market loans, and investment banks from accepting public deposits. This was an effort to prevent a wave of stock market speculation like that of the twenties by keeping commercial banking and investment banking separate and distinct. [pg 84] [Clinton got rid of that and other limits on the banks.]
What changes were made the Banking Act of 1935?
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was made permanent, and the Board of Governors was given power to change reserve requirements. The act of 1935 had other important revisions :
(1) The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System was changed. Membership no longer included the Secretary of the Treasury and the Comptroller of the Currency, and the number of members was cut from nine to seven. The name, the Federal Reserve Board, was changed to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The reorganized Board, with its increased powers really gave us a central bank for the first time, in place of a system of individual Federal Reserve banks which were largely on their own.
(2) Also of primary importance in creating a true central bank was the establishment of the Federal Open Market Committee to determine purchases and sales of Government securities for the entire System.
(3) Another change made by the 1935 act related to loans of the Federal Reserve banks. This act allowed the Federal Reserve banks to extend reserve bank credit on any type of credit which the commercial bank possessed.
4 ) The 1935 act also contained provisions concerning regulation of bank holding companies. [Pg 84]
Private banks enjoy a very special relationship with the Federal Government. After all, most business firms employ private capital or privately owned resources to produce a product or provide a service which can be profitably sold in the marketplace. Most business firms pay for the raw materials and services they receive, and, furthermore, in the case of most kinds of business firms, the business itself is a risk-taking venture. The firm succeeds or fails in competition with other business firms.
But the conditions under which private banks operate are very different. In the first place, one of the major functions of the private commercial banks is to create money. A large portion of bank profits come from the fact that the banks do create money. And, as we have pointed out, banks create money without cost to themselves, in the process of lending or investing in securities such a Government bonds. Bank profits come from interest on the money lent and invested, while the cost of creating money is negligible. (Banks do incur costs, of course, from bookkeeping to loan officers’ salaries.) The power to create money has been delegated, or loaned, by Congress to the private banks for their free use. There is no charge.
On the contrary, this is but one of the many ways the Government subsidizes the private banking system and protects it from competition. The Government, through the Federal Reserve System, provides a huge subsidy through the free services the System provides for member banks. “Check clearing” is one of the services; i.e., the collection and payment of funds due one bank from another because of depositors’ use of their checkbook money. The costs of this service alone runs into scores of millions of dollars.
The gross expenses of the combined Federal Reserve banks totaled $207 million in 1963, most of which was incurred as a cost of providing free services to the private banks. Other Federal agencies also receive services from the Federal Reserve. But these are not free. The System received about $20 million for “fiscal agency and other expenses” in 1963.
In addition, the Federal Government provides private banks with a large measure of protection from competition, and the hazards of failure. … This means, in brief, that nobody can enter the banking business by opening a national bank, unless the proposed bank is to be located where it will not cause an inconvenient amount of competition to other banks already in business. [pg 89]
In mid-August of 1950, however, the Federal Reserve raised the discount rate and short-term Treasury bills jumped toward 11/2 percent, although there were requests from the Secretary of the Treasury and the President for the System to continue a low-rate policy. It was later revealed by testimony of some of the Federal Reserve officials to committees of Congress that the Open Market Committee had held a meeting on August 18 and decided not only t o raise the discount rate, but to “go their own way” on the Government longer term bond rate as well, despite what the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the head of the Office of Defense Mobilization might do…. Since the signing of the so-called accord, in March of 1951, this event has been widely interpreted as an understanding, reached between the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, that the Federal Reserve would henceforth be “independent.” It would no longer ” peg Government bond prices. It would raise or lower interest rates as it might see fit, as a means of trying to prevent inflation or deflation.
These are understandings which have been grafted onto the accord over the years. Certainly, no such understandings were universal at the time the accord was signed. ….
At the end of 1951, then, the Federal Reserve had both self-proclaimed independence, as a result of the accord, and an operational policy which aimed at maximum credit effects through minimum changes in interest rates….. the Federal Reserve people were quite sure that they could do a better job of running the country than the President, and with only slight increases in interest rates. …
It then added another string to its bow- the “bills only” policy. … Henceforth when the Treasury issued bonds or medium-term securities, it was to dump these issues on the market and watch the natural consequences-first a drop in bond prices, then a gradual recovery as the market absorbed the bonds. Any private rigging or manipulations of the market were to go without interference from the Federal Reserve, as were any speculative booms or panics short of a “disorderly” market. The “bil1s-only” policy had only one reservation: The Federal Reserve would buy long-term bonds in the event that the Open Market Committee made a findings that the market was disorderly. [ full details starting on pg 103]
The [Eisenhower ] administration announced at the outset that it would re1y on monetary policy exclusive1y for its economic regulation and would respect the complete independence of the Federal Reserve to carry out these policies as it saw fit …..
Thirteen years have now passed since the accord and the liberation of the Federal Reserve. What have been the results? The major result is shockingly obvious. Interest rates have climbed steadily, with slight interruptions, during the entire post accord period. (See table 3.) The period has been marked, then, by a continual shift of income to the banks, other major financial institutions, and individuals with significant interest income. The rest of the country provided this income. …
Another result of post accord monetary policy is that the U.S. economy has unwittingly become a low investment economy… The Federal Reserve has chosen the high interest, slower growth option for this country.
In fiscal year 1963, the U S Government paid out approximately $10 billion as interest on the national debt. The budget deficit for the same year was $8.8 billion. Much political hay was made with the deficit. It was potential inflationary dynamite, ran the ”no deficit” claim. And these same people strongly supported tighter money and higher interest rates to prevent the otherwise inevitable inflationary explosion. Yet if these people were really worried about the deficit they should have been rabid partisans of a low-interest policy. For it can be shown that last year’s deficit would have been $5 billion less if the Government had not been forced by Federal Reserve policy to pay increasingly more on its outstanding debt. I n fact, the total national debt would now be $40 billion less if the interest rates of the early 1940’s had prevailed in the postwar period.
Moreover, the system eludes even the audit control exercised by the General Accounting Office, whose function it is to make sure that other Federal agencies not only handle their financial affairs properly but also pursue policies and practices that are in accord with the law. The system provides for its own auditing; clutching its mantle of independence, it has stoutly resisted repeated congressional suggestions that the General Accounting Office perform an annual audit.[ pg 121]
Congress has never given authority for determining monetary policy to the Federal Reserve System-and certainly not to a committee within the System containing members who owe their selection to private bank interests. This basic authorization has not been changed by any amendments to the Federal Reserve Act made to date. Yet two evolutions have taken place within the Federal Reserve System, in one instance, without authorization, and, in the other, directly contrary to the expressed intent of the Federal Reserve Act. In brief, the Federal Reserve’s “monetary policies,” as they are practiced today, were never authorized by law…There is little doubt in the author’s mind that if any legal challenge were ever raised to the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies, the courts could hold them unconstitutional.
The First Annual Report of the Board of Governors after passage of the 1935 act opened with a statement that the act “places responsibility for national monetary and credit on the Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee”-although the act contained no reference whatever to monetary policy nor any provision which indicated a change in the convertibility concept on which the 1913 act was drawn. In brief, the Federal Reserve’s “monetary policies,” as they are practiced today, were never authorized by law.
The monetary powers, as has frequently been pointed out, are reserved to the Congress by the constitution. There is no doubt that it is within the prerogative of the Congress to delegate these powers either to the executive branch of the Government or to an independent agency. But it is not within Congress’s constitutional means to delegate these powers without prescribing policy objectives and clear guidelines detailing how the powers may be used. Inevitably, the Supreme Court has held unconstitutional those grants of powers made without any spelling out of the specific objectives and limitations placed on their use [pg 128]
This second change, whatever else it accomplished, did open the door to private banker influence in the formation of monetary policy. T h e regional bank presidents have become policymakers. At the very least, the type of man chosen to become the president of a regional bank affects the bent of Open Market Committee thinking. Now the private bankers have the dominant voice in choosing the regional bank presidents. They are hardly likely to choose and retain man as presidents whose approach to monetary matters does not in general conform to their taste.
I hope you take the time to read these excerpts and do not blow your blood pressure too high.
“Capitalists with government help are the worst of all economic phenomena.” — A. Rand
Rand was wrong, the absolute worst economic phenomenon is “Capitalists with government help ALL paid for by counterfeit money printed by the Robber Baron Bankers”
