The Vaxx Kills More than Covid

A US military flight surgeon testifies that the Covid vaccines have killed more US soldiers than Covid did:

Dr. Theresa Long, a flight surgeon who holds a master’s degree in Public Health and is specially trained in the DMED, gave emotional testimony on March 10. She and two other flight surgeons reviewed DMED last year and made some stunning discoveries about the high incidence of apparent vaccine injuries among members of the military.

According to the whistleblowers, certain disorders spiked after the vaccine mandate went into effect, including miscarriages and cancers, and neurological problems which increased by 1000 percent.

Dr. Long testified that she was contacted by high level officer the night before the hearing, and told not to discuss her findings regarding the explosive military medical data in court. The whistleblower reportedly said she felt threatened after she tried to get her superiors to address the findings, “fearing for her life and for the safety of her children.”

Since the whistleblowers came forward with the DMED data, the DoD has thrown cold water on their conclusions, saying the increase in vaccine injuries was caused by a “glitch in the database.”

Politifact contacted Peter Graves, spokesperson for the Defense Health Agency’s Armed Forces Surveillance Division, who said the data for 2021 is correct, but for some reason, the data for the five years prior was inaccurate. Graves told PolitiFact by email that the division reviewed data in the DMED “and found that the data was incorrect for the years 2016-2020.”

In other words, for five straight years, the data was seriously corrupted and none of the DoD’s data analysts figured this out, and then it fixed itself on its own in 2021. The DoD has since put out new numbers showing more illnesses among the troops for the years prior to 2021….

Dr. Long also testified that the data shows that deaths of military members from the vaccines exceed deaths from COVID itself.

No government statistics can be believed anymore, because all of the statistical offices have been converged. That being said, it is sound logic to assume that the errors are biased in support of the Narrative; the “glitch in the database” defense is even more a priori absurd than the idea that it is safer for an otherwise-healthy individual to be repeatedly injected with spike proteins and other untested substances than endure a few days of fatigue from Covid.

DISCUSS ON SG

Preparing to Back Down

Some officials of the Fake Biden Administration are beginning to think about how they’re going to climb down from the “Failed Russian Invasion” narrative they’ve relentlessly pushed since the day it began now that it is becoming obvious that they simply didn’t understand Russia’s limited objectives:

One major issue the Tiger Team is looking at is the threshold that could prompt the alliance to use military force in Ukraine. Mr. Biden has made clear that he is enormously reluctant to do so, fearing that direct confrontation with Russia could escalate the conflict beyond control. “That’s World War III,” he noted recently.

A second team of officials, also created by Mr. Sullivan’s Feb. 28 memo, is looking at long-term opportunities for the United States to improve its geopolitical position as a result of Mr. Putin’s invasion. Inside the White House, it has become an article of faith that the Russian leader made a huge strategic error — one that will diminish Russia’s standing, cripple its economy and alienate potential allies for years. But it is early in the conflict, other officials caution, and that conclusion may prove premature.

The immediate concern is what Mr. Putin may do next — driven by a desire to rescue a failing military effort or re-establish his credentials as a force to be feared.

Officials believe the chances that Mr. Putin will resort to detonating a nuclear weapon are small. But Russia’s steady stream of reminders that it has its arsenal at the ready, and could use it in response to anything it perceives as an “existential threat,” has put Washington on high alert.

The narrative concerning Putin’s threats about resorting to nuclear weaponry is also false. NATO, the US, and the globalist media have all interpreted these threats as indicating desperation that supports the failed invasion assumption. But that isn’t true. The reason that the Russians have continuously hammered home their willingness to use nuclear weapons, both tactical and strategic, is because US strategy specifically assumes that no one will ever use nuclear weapons under any circumstances, thereby rationalizing the use of the very conventional measures that will trigger a nuclear response under the Russian military doctrine.

DISCUSS ON SG

Ukraine Resorts to Black Magic

In case you weren’t certain which side in the NATO vs Russia conflict worships Satan and is relying upon him for victory:

Ukrainian witches are seeking to hold a special three-step ritual to oust Russian President Vladimir Putin, UNIAN news agency reported, citing a statement by a Kiev-based Witch Cauldron esoteric shop.

“On March 31, on the 29th lunar day, the day of corruption and curses, we, the witches of Ukraine, in collaboration with foreign partners, will perform a ritual of punishing the enemy of the Ukrainian people – Vladimir Putin,” the witches’ statement posted on Instagram reads.

The ritual will be performed in three phases, with the first one scheduled to happen at Ukraine’s “place of power,” the witches stated, apparently referring to the Bald Mountain outside Kiev. So far, some 13 witches have expressed willingness to take part in the anti-Putin coven. The second coven is set to be held at an unspecified “Slavic country” in cooperation with “foreign colleagues.” The ritual is expected to conclude with the creation of a “stone sack” for Russia’s president, who will supposedly face “isolation, ousting from power and loss of support from the inner circle.”

This is really not the amusing little joke that the media presents it as being. You may not believe in anything esoteric or occultic. But rest assured that a great many rich, powerful, and influential people do.

DISCUSS ON SG

Convergence and Crime Statistics

Read about the FBI’s latest statistical shenanigans in the context of Vox Day’s Law of Convergence: To the extent it has been converged, a converged organization will be unable to perform its primary functions.

On March 21, the FBI released their quarterly uniform crime report. Nothing unusual about that, with the UCR as its referred often used by members of the media as well as law enforcement officials to gauge violent crime in their communities. However, a funny thing happened on the way to the release, with the following note posted at the top of the home page:

“The Quarterly Uniform Crime Report was made available on March 21, 2022.

For this quarterly release, due to agency participation being under the 60 percent threshold, data trends by region and aggregate population group will not be available. Data from individual city agencies with populations of 100,000 or greater can be accessed in the Resources section below.” [emphasis added]

Hmmm. Interesting. So apparently, the FBI is claiming that not enough police agencies submitted the data used by the FBI to provide national statistics. Does that make any sense to anyone? Especially since (the last we knew) providing of those statistics is not optional?

So in other words, Democrats…and we know Democrats like the backs of our hands…will now be able to point to FBI crime statistics and claim…without context, mind you…that the crime rate which those evil Republicans have been complaining about are in fact falling.

In other words, in its attempt to hide the effects of Democratic policies on crime, the converged FBI has rendered void the purpose of its Quarterly Uniform Crime Report, as it no longer even attempts to accurately report the amount of crime taking place throughout the United States and is now useless for the purposes of historical analysis.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Intoxification of Success

The neocons running the neo-liberal world order are not hesitating to sabotage the economies they are financially raping even though the negative consequences are obvious.

Ross: Michael, sanctions, sanctions, sanctions is all we hear now. We’re sanctioning people. The West sanction people back to the Stone Age. What are the unintended consequences of sanctions?

Michael Hudson: Well, one is to serve very much like a protective tariff on the sanctioned country. For instance, when America made sanctions on European trade with Russia, Lithuania dutifully stopped exporting cheese to Russia. Well, the result is that Russia set up its own cheese’s sector, and now it’s self-sufficient in cheese. If you sanction a country, you force it to become more self-reliant and across the board, from agriculture to dairy products to technology, Russia is forced to become more self-reliant and at the same time to depend much more on trade with China for the things that it is still not self-reliant in. So America is bringing about exactly the opposite of what it intended. It’s hopeless to somehow isolate Russia and then be able to go after China without Russia. And instead, what it’s doing is integrating the Eurasian core, Russia and China, exactly the policy that Henry Kissinger warned against going all the way back to Mackinder a century ago that said, Eurasia is the world island, Russia and China could be the whole world centre. That’s what the fight is all about. Well, American sanctions are driving Russia and China together, and America has gone to China and said, Please don’t support Russia. It most recently, on Monday, March 14, Jake Sullivan came out and told China, we will sanction countries that break our sanctions against Russia. And basically, China said, fine. You know, we’ll just break off all the trade between East and West now and the East, Eurasia is pretty much self-sufficient. The West is not self-sufficient since it began to industrialise, and it’s heavily dependent on Russia for not only oil and gas, but palladium and many raw materials. So the sanctions are ending up driving a wedge between the European countries.

Ross: Don’t people who apply these sanctions think this through? Are they so short-sighted they don’t understand that these sanctions are going to build further capacity within Russia, push Russia further towards China, make that economic alliance concrete and, ultimately, you’re not going to be able to keep the lights on in in Europe? All the while underestimating the fact that from a food security point of view – take the U.K., for instance, a net importer of food – not appreciating the fact that, for instance, Russia/Ukraine, they create twenty five percent, a quarter, of all wheat annually. The estimation this year is one hundred and two million tonnes Russia and Ukraine, wheat. Don’t people realise that there’s going to be a massive knock on effect?

Michael Hudson: Yes, they do realise it. Yes, they’ve thought it all through. I worked with these people for more than 50 years.

Ross: Who are these people?

Michael Hudson: The neocons, basically, the people who are in charge of U.S. foreign policy? Victoria Nuland and her husband, Robert Kagan, the people that President Biden has appointed all around him, from Blinken to Sullivan and right down the line. They are basically urging people around the New American Century. They’re the people who said America can run the whole world and create its own reality. And yes, they know that this is going to cause enormous problems for Germany. They know that not only will it block the energy that Germany and Italy and other countries in Europe need through their oil and gas, but also it’ll block the use of gas for fertiliser, upping their fertiliser production and decreasing their food production. They look at this and they say, How can America gain from all of this? There’s always a way of gaining what something looks to be bad.

In fact, sanctions against Russia and Iran have worked so well in bending those nations to the will of the global imperialists that now they’re actively pushing for sanctions on China.

Britain will sanction China if it supports Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, a Cabinet minister warned last night. Trade Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan urged Beijing not to send arms or financial aid to Russia after the US claimed it requested China’s support, which both countries deny.

Joe Biden last week warned Chinese president Xi Jinping there will be ‘consequences’ if he backs the invasion.

‘We’ve sanctioned Belarus right alongside Russia precisely because they basically said ‘feel free to park your tanks on our lawn’. That is just not acceptable,’ she added.

I used to wonder how Hitler could possibly have been dumb enough to seek a two-front war after being unable to finish off Britain in 1940, and how the Japanese armed forces could have imagined it was a good idea to bring the USA into the Pacific war while they were still absorbed with fighting the Communists and Kuomintang armies in China. Both ideas appeared, in historical hindsight, to have been obviously stupid even at the times the decisions were made. And it is already obvious that the multi-front economic war is a failure, even before the Chinese front has been opened.

What is clear is that Western sanctions policy is the worst of all worlds. We are allowing Putin to exploit Russia’s leverage as a full-spectrum commodity superpower.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Now that I’ve seen how the neocons who have taken over the US empire and overthrown the governments of Iraq, Libya, and Ukraine are intoxicated with their successes, it doesn’t surprise me that they would attempt to extend their European satrapy by engaging in economic war with both Russia and China. And it shouldn’t surprise anyone if the consequences of their failure will be even more horrific for them and their subjects than the consequences of their previous failures were.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Ticket is No Guarantee

Eventually, the wicked tire of paying the price to pretend their servants are successful:

Investors at BuzzFeed are reportedly pressuring CEO Jonah Peretti to close down its entire money-losing news operation as senior journalists announced their resignations on Tuesday.

Mark Schoffs, the editor in chief of BuzzFeed News, and two of his top deputies quit in the latest sign of turmoil at the cash-strapped company.

Schoffs informed staffers at the online publication that he would be stepping down on Tuesday, according to The Information. Tom Namako, Schoffs’ deputy news editor, and Ariel Kaminer, the executive editor of investigations, also announced that they planned on leaving their posts, according to the report.

Journalists working for the site have been told that more job cuts are in the offing, The Information reported. Fewer than 30 journalists in the 100-person newsroom have already been offered buyouts, according to CNBC. The reporters who were offered exit packages cover investigations, inequality, politics, and science. Many of them have worked for BuzzFeed for more than a year.

The news operation at BuzzFeed loses around $10 million per year, CNBC reported. BuzzFeed is expected to lose between $15 million and $20 million in the first quarter of this year.

Imagine how much content we could produce if we were willing to burn $80 million per year. And keep in mind, this is what supposed “success” looks like. Who needs it? Who even wants it?

DISCUSS ON SG

Russia Will Go Nuclear… if necessary

Dominic Cummings points out that US nuclear strategy has always rested on false and self-serving assumptions.

In the Cold War America based its nuclear strategy on an intellectual framework that was false.

It defined standards of ‘rationality’ then concluded the Soviets would not use nuclear weapons in many scenarios. There was a governing tautology: rational leaders would be deterred otherwise they would be irrational. Given this tautology, more vulnerability improves ‘stability’ (e.g submarine launched weapons), while better defence is ‘destabilising’ (e.g missile defence).

The Cold War was won. The West concluded ‘we were right’. Many in the world of policy concluded: there is a reliable theory of nuclear strategy that allows us to send carefully calibrated signals, like ‘escalate to de-escalate’. You can see this false confidence in many politicians, journalists and academics over the past month. E.g Professor Elliot Cohen’s calls for America to attack Russian forces because he’s confident Putin is bluffing.

After the 1991 collapse some scholars went to talk to those actually in charge in Russia. They read documents. They discovered that we’d been wrong in crucial ways all along. Actually the Soviets planned early and heavy use of nuclear weapons in many scenarios including outbreak of conventional war in Europe.

The theoretical basis of some of the west’s analysis, such as game theory from the likes of the economist Schelling, had been disastrously misleading. More important (I think) was the development of a theory that encouraged leaders/strategists to ignore an eternal lesson of history: one story after another of people risking death in ways opponents or observers thought ‘irrational’, ‘crazy’.

Despite being a game designer, I would not hesitate to declare that history is a much more reliable guide to anticipating human behavior than game theory. Because humans are irrational creatures and game theory relies upon something that is observably rare, to the extent it can even be said to exist at all, which is to say human rationality.

Cummings also points out that the globalist narrative concerning the Russian leader flies directly in the face of these strategic assumptions.

The more you think ‘Putin made a terrible blunder in invading Ukraine, he’s lost the plot, isolated by covid fear, the institutions around him don’t work, he’s fed lies by sycophants’ — which is the standard view in London and DC today — the more sceptical you should be that simplistic ideas from the Cold War about ‘rationality’ and deterrence would work as planned.

Fortunately, the globalist narrative is entirely false. Which, no doubt, is why Cummings has reached the correct conclusion that should be shared by every Christian, every defender of Western civilization, and anyone who cherishes the Good, the Beautiful, and the True.

If you care about ‘preserving western values’, I strongly advise that you focus on regime change in London and Washington, not in Moscow. Putin is less dangerous than our own idiocracy.

DISCUSS ON SG