That Sounds… Familiar

The gatekeeper selected for France’s nationalist right is certainly utilizing some interesting rhetoric:

We’re now on to the issue that drives Zemmour’s political mission and fuels his incendiary campaign. ‘Immigration is war,’ he says, hitting his rhetorical stride. ‘They want to invade our European countries. That’s all. It’s nothing else. It’s war.’

‘Do you think Macron is deploying migrants as a weapon of war?’ I ask, fishing without a licence for a newsline.

‘I don’t think he has such malicious intent,’ he replies. ‘He’s not Erdogan. No, you mustn’t exaggerate. I just think that he is, how can I put, ideologically in favour of immigration.’

Zemmour has for some years been a leading public intellectual in France, a popular historian as well as a television provocateur and one of the country’s most famous journalists. He litters his speech with great quotes: ‘As Victor Hugo said… As Voltaire said… As Chateaubriand said…’ He speaks in newspaper columns: press his opinion button and he’s off. His eloquence is almost hypnotic.

Macron, he goes on, is gripped by ‘an individualistic ideology. He thinks every individual is basically the same and can live everywhere. Of course, he will enforce rules here and there, but fundamentally…the existence of peoples to him seems outdated.’

Does he blame the economic liberalism of Thatcher and Reagan for the excessive individualism to which Macron subscribes? ‘I wouldn’t say that,’ he replies. ‘It’s more a deviation from Christian humanism. As Chesterton said: “It’s Christian virtues gone mad.”’

Western societies, Zemmour suggests, have ‘simply forgotten that in Christian humanism there is indeed the respect for the individual but that is rooted in a culture, a religion, a people, a land… [today] we have the individual who is sacred, very well, but who is completely isolated from his people, his historical context, his customs. You see it is believed that individuals are interchangeable, that they are only consumers. It’s an economistic view that I don’t share. I think that people are first of all a product of their culture, their people, their customs.’

I rather like Zemmour, but I don’t trust him in the slightest and not merely because he isn’t French. Remember, Macron once talked a semi-reasonable game too. And “Christian humanism” is a half-step toward “our judeochristian values”. But the biggest problem is the way in which a journalist is suddenly being taken seriously as a political candidate. It’s rather as if the Republicans suddenly put forward Ben Shapiro for the 2024 presidential nomination because he was so accomplished at “owning the liberals”.

As the Germans and the Russians learned, nationalist leaders who aren’t actually of the nation don’t tend to work out very well for anyone involved.


Verdict: Not Unfair

I’ll admit to occasionally getting frustrated with Larry Correia’s insistence on abiding with the mainstream platforms that hate him rather than throwing in with the alternative economy and friendly platforms, but I also have to admit that there is no one like him for pure literary vituperation and excoriation, be it personal or political.

Anytime there is a breaking news story, there will be legions of howling leftists, and blue check mark idiots, lying their asses off and saying the most horrific things imaginable. And since they literally own social media, they get an official pass while the uppity on the right get officially squashed. We’ve all seen it. From trending hash tags that mysterious vanish, shadow bans, to ultra-biased fact checkers, to Youtube demonetizing wrong thinkers or even getting rid of the thumbs down button.

Yet as your fellow travelers are saying all this horrid shit, where are you? You’re supposedly sane. You claim to have a voice of moderation, but it must be a whisper because we certainly can’t hear it.

Social media is a constant barrage of Common Internet Shit Gibbons popping in and screaming at everybody who diverges from the accepted leftist narrative. They work off a standardized playbook and repetitive talking points, sneering derision, and passive aggressive insults designed to get around algorithms, and it is all designed to shame people into silence.

Yet many people on the right are slowly waking up to this game, and they’re beginning to fight back, skipping the false civility, and getting right to the meat of things, and returning insult for insult… Oh THEN I can count on the Caring Liberals to show up! Inevitably, every fucking time. Whenever someone on the right fights back, that’s when the real-life liberals you know magically appear to cry about “civility” and “tone” and such rudeness!

Gee whiz, Aunt Margaret/coworker #7/guy from the gym. Where the fuck were you when the leftist assholes were screeching at me and wiping their diseased anus on my carpet? Nowhere. Oh yeah, that’s right. It’s because you voices of reason don’t actually care about civility, you just care about shaming your wrong thinking friends and family into compliance. You emotionally manipulative motherfuckers.

Why do I have such scorn and derision for the so-called reasonable voices on the left? A. I don’t believe most of you. B. If you do exist, you’re cowards, who do nothing, say nothing, and then maybe show up after the dust settles to chide the rest of us about our tone.

Anybody with the courage to speak up on the left is swiftly set upon by the rest and devoured. They’re the cow and social justice warriors are the piranhas.

Sad part is I know many liberals in real life who will admit that they helped create a monster, and its now gone out of control, and the beast will eat them if they draw its ire. Oh, they’ll tell me this in person, but they won’t say shit in public. Because they know they’ll get cancelled, boycotted, fired, mocked, threatened, and kicked out of the Goodthinkers Club.

There is more. There is a LOT more where that came from. And it’s all true. The key line: “Liberal “friends” will sell you out in a heartbeat.”

DISCUSS ON SG



The Facts on the Ground

Karl Denninger reminds us of what we now know from experience, rather than theory, as the media begins its latest round of fearmongering over the so-called “omicron” variant which supposedly emerged in Botswana. Or South Africa. Or, possibly, Australia.

This “variant” has been found all over the world already. Therefore its already everywhere. Locking down travel after it is already in your nation is stupid and does nothing. The variant is either going to become dominant or it will not. You cannot alter that course once it gets to you — and no matter where you are it already has.

This “variant” has no evidence of being more deadly; it may in fact be less-so. Indeed that is the natural mutational pattern coronaviruses follow over time. There is no evidence in the form, for example, of higher hospital admissions, ICU utilization and death in those in which this variant has been detected. In other words thus far all the scaremongering has been based on….. exactly nothing as there are no facts currently in evidence to support such fear.

The vaccines clearly do not work. International travel has been vaccinated-only everywhere for quite some time. So the person(s) who brought the virus into your nation with this “variant” were vaccinated. The market, of course, responded to this news by spiking the vaccine companies, specifically Moderna. You have to wonder what sort of stupidity would drive someone to consider a firm that has one product which clearly did not work a “buy” in a situation like this. Mass psychosis is the only reasonable explanation.

Lockdowns and constraints clearly do not work either. The virus mutated because that’s what viruses do, and specifically coronaviruses do this all the time. It’s common. Further, vaccinating into an outbreak promotes vaccine-resistant strains because that’s just how natural selection works. You want the opposite but you can’t get there from here by vaccinating people while an outbreak is going on so the better option is to focus on early treatments and even prophylaxis which does not place immune pressure on the virus to evade your jabs.

Meanwhile the evidence continues to mount that prior infection confers better resistance than vaccines. Perfect immunity? No. But much better immunity and, to three nines, perfect protection against critical illness and death.
There were no cases of critical disease at reinfection and 28 cases at primary infection (Table S3), for an odds ratio of 0.00 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.64). There were no cases of death from Covid-19 at reinfection and 7 cases at primary infection resulting in an odds ratio of 0.00…

So which do you prefer, since while the jabs do appear to provide some protection it wanes and it certainly does not prevent 100% of the severe and fatal outcomes.

Never mind the jab side effect profiles, which are quite dangerous, the evidence is mounting that the intermediate and long-term dangers are very significant and, in addition, there is mounting evidence that if you get jabbed and then are infected, and you will get infected, you are likely to not build “N” protein recognition so you can get infected again and again until you get the bad case that screws you. This is due to a well-recognized phenomena called “OAS” (“Original Antigenic Sin”) and is directly caused by the vaccines as they “train” your body to produce “S” antibodies, which is all they contain coding for and not “N” protein antibodies which are critical as the virus cannot mutate in that part to any material degree and remain a viable virus.

On the other hand the evidence is that beating the disease without a jab once means you have durable protection against critical and fatal outcomes on an extremely reliable basis including potential mutations since the “N” protein does not and cannot undergo substantial change.

The latter, by the way, is the pattern for every serious viral disease outbreak through history.

It’s becoming increasingly obvious that this entire two-year global anti-virus campaign has been a charade. Whatever the true objective was, neither saving lives nor health care was actually the purpose. Which reminds us, once again, that the one thing we can be absolutely certain is not true is whatever the official story being pushed by the government-media complex is.

DISCUSS ON SG


Don’t Believe the Numbers

As with most official government numbers, the number of vaccinated people is an estimate of a supposedly representative sample:

Pennsylvania on Wednesday said 68.8% of adult residents are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 — far less than the 73.7% cited on Tuesday and numbers highlighted in news releases for weeks.

A news release gave little explanation beyond saying the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday “began to rectify their data to match Pennsylvania COVID-19 vaccine data and we anticipate the CDC to go through a similar process with other states across the country.”

In human terms, it equals 1,076,911 adult Pennsylvanians who were believed to be fully vaccinated on Tuesday and who, as it turns out, are not, according to data from health department spokeswoman Maggi Barton.

The number pertains to people 18 or older.

I’m not saying that the future reductions will compare to the 97 percent reduction in fatal Covid cases that was seen once Italy began to report more honest statistics, but it’s quite safe to assume that most governments are exaggerating the number of vaccinated people out there.




Omicron is ADE

It appears the door just opened to one of the nightmare scenarios, Antibody Dependent Enhancement:

Vaccinated people are now stuck with this mediocre immune response, that’s intended for a variant that no longer exists. This really looks like the scenario where you’re worse off being vaccinated than you are if you’re unvaccinated. And if this is somehow not yet the big one, the one that uses everyone’s highly identical immune response against the Wuhan version of the spike protein to its own advantage, then you can rest assured that when it grows dominant, it will be giving birth to descendants that will do the trick.

Let me grab an old study from Japanese scientists, who tried to answer the question: Under what circumstances do we see antibody dependent enhancement? That is, a situation in which the virus uses your overall vaccine induced antibody response to its own advantage, leaving you worse off than if you had never been vaccinated in the first place. They determined it’s pretty easy: You take Delta and you add these four mutations:

K417N, N439K, E484K and N501Y.

If you throw those four mutations into Delta, you have a version that uses your vaccine induced antibody response to its own advantage.

Does that ring a bell?

So let’s see:

-K417N: Bingo!

-N439K: No, but we have N440K which is a neighboring mutation and should perform the same trick of interfering with the antibodies.

-E484K: We have E484A, which means you have a mutation at the same spot, but resulting in a different amino acid, Alanine instead of Lysine.

-N501Y: Bingo!

In other words, its mutations look pretty much identical to what the Japanese scientists were warning would allow Delta to use your vaccine induced antibody response to its own advantage.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that everyone who is vaccinated is doomed. Remember, the virus isn’t much more harmful than regular influenza; only 3 percent of the Italians who died WITH Covid actually died OF Covid. But it does mean that all of the lockdowns and vaccines and mandates are as useless as the vaccination skeptics have been telling everyone from the start. Everyone would have been better off relying upon their natural and cross-immunities, fortified by the appropriate vitamin stacks and treatment protocols.

In contrast to vaccine-induced immunity, no increased risk for reinfection with Beta, Gamma or Delta variants relative to Alpha variant was found in individuals with infection-induced immunity.

And despite what the media is going to tell you, more boosters are not the answer. They’ll only further weaken people’s immune systems as well as possibly exacerbating the antibody dependent enhancement.

UPDATE: Right on schedule, from the UK:

All adults are to be offered a coronavirus booster jab to help stop the Omicron variant.

DISCUSS ON SG


A Very Dangerous Game

The Biden Fake Administration is playing with fire by inviting the representatives of Taiwan island to the Summit of Democracies in less than two weeks.

The Biden administration this week brazenly announced its intention to walk over China’s red line warning on Taiwan. The move by the US is a recklessly provocative step that dares an inevitable military response from Beijing. If that happens then all bets are off for a full-scale military confrontation between the United States, its allies, and China. It is not alarmist to say such a clash would escalate into World War III.

Australia and Britain are explicitly committed to a military alliance with the United States in the Asia-Pacific through the recently formed AUKUS pact. Russia will be obliged to defend China.

The date in question is December 9-10 when the Biden administration plays host to a so-called “Summit of Democracies”. This week the State Department announced a list of “participants” that include 110 countries. China and Russia are not invited, among other excluded nations.

Most provocatively, the separatist Chinese territory of Taiwan is invited to attend the video conference. The US is careful to refer to Taiwan as a “participant” not as a “nation”. Nevertheless, this semantical device aside, the invitation is a blatant violation of China’s sovereign claim of authority over Taiwan….

At a teleconference summit on November 16, China’s President Xi Jinping admonished US policy on Taiwan as “playing with fire”. Xi drew a red line that Washington must desist from inciting separatist ambitions of the Taiwanese government.

The announcement this week of the “Summit of Democracies” and specifically the invitation of Taiwan while excluding China is about as bold as it can get by the Biden administration in undermining China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. That it comes only days after a verbal commitment from Biden to Xi that the US adheres to One China Policy and is not seeking Taiwan’s independence makes the provocation all the more contemptuous.

I suppose we’ll find out soon enough if Xi is prone to posturing with regards to Taiwan or not. Based on his domestic record, I don’t have the impression that he is. And while I wouldn’t characterize a hot war over Taiwan as WWIII – I doubt it would last as long as the Falklands War – it strikes me as being as patently ludicrous as it is unnecessary.

But it is clear that the global imperialists will take war with China if they can’t get it with Russia or Iran. Although they might get a 3-for-1 bargain if they’re foolish enough.

The Russia-India-China (RIC) format has contributed to building a multipolar world order and rule of international law, and is a key global and regional policy factor, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reported on Friday at the online meeting of the RIC foreign ministers.

DISCUSS ON SG