The Vaxx Nazis Back Down

Germany “delays” its vaccine mandate:

Germany’s plans to impose nationwide compulsory vaccination against Covid-19 likely won’t come to fruition any time soon, not due to lack of will but because of bureaucratic hurdles, media reports suggest.

In November, then-designated chancellor Olaf Scholz told Germany’s ZDF broadcaster that he expected a nationwide vaccination mandate to be introduced by February or March. Now, however, the regulation might not be in force until May or even June, the Tagesspiegel daily reported.

The delay is not a sign that Scholz’s government is any less determined to see Germans vaccinated but is merely due to a series of bureaucratic hurdles, the paper said.

These vaccine mandates are not going to be imposed or enforced. Mostly, I suspect, because the politicians want to live. They push-push-pushed to discover where the hard red lines were drawn, and they have ascertained that there are hundreds of millions of people who will quite literally kill anyone who tries to forcibly vaccinate them. And they are right to take that position, as both bodily integrity and self-defense are basic human rights that any self-respecting human being will defend at any cost.

I think the people of Europe have shown remarkable restraint to date in not turning on their idiot leaders. But it’s not early 2020 anymore and now everyone with even half-a-brain recognizes that the vaxxes are unsafe, ineffective, and unnecessary.


Our Fingers Were Crossed!

The US Secretary of State is attempting to play revisionist talmudics in order to justify the NATO expansion that has both Russia and China on a war footing:

NATO has never promised not to admit new members, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken claimed on Friday, labelling Russia’s demands of the bloc inadmissible. However, long-declassified Western documents suggest otherwise.

“NATO never promised not to admit new members,” the top American diplomat told journalists during Friday’s press briefing, as he commented on Moscow’s proposals to the bloc on security guarantees, ahead of upcoming NATO-Russia meetings next week.

“It could not and would not – the ‘open door policy’ was a core provision of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty that founded NATO,” Blinken added. He then pointed to the fact that both Mikhail Gorbachev – the Soviet leader who’d allegedly received the guarantees of non-expansion from the Western leaders – and the former US Secretary of State James Baker, who allegedly provided them, among others – denied anything like that ever happened.

“There was no promise that NATO wouldn’t expand,” Blinken concluded, adding that, instead, Moscow had itself recognized every European nation’s right to choose its own path in the field of security by joining the Istanbul Charter for European Security in 1999.

Such a position has apparently become commonplace in the bloc after Moscow came up with a set of proposals that it said would alleviate current tensions between Russia and the collective West. The proposals would see the Brussels-based organisation agree to curb its territorial growth as a form of a security guarantee for Russia.

After the proposals were presented to NATO in December 2021, its Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also stated that the bloc had never promised not to expand. Yet, a trove of documents, made public as early as in 2017, suggests that it did.

Russia Today

This is a remarkably stupid game the Fake Biden administration is playing. The neocons are attempting to utilize juvenile narrative-shaping tactics in a world of hardened diplomats and generals who couldn’t care less what a few lawyers assumed back in 1949. It appears the neocons are about to discover that their lawyerly verbal tactics don’t work on people who, unlike Americans and Europeans, are not high-trusting children.

It’s the usual bait-and-switch offered by a deceiver. Even if NATO never made any formal promises not to expand, the leaders of every major Western country at the time promised that NATO would not expand to the EAST, i.e. in the direction of Russia. Which NATO subsequently did after 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union that was the raison d’etre for its existence. If Vladimir Putin were to reassure the world that Russia will not attack NATO, just all of the countries that violated their past assurances to Russia, would anyone find that comforting?

The neocons would do very well to recall that the Russians have never promised not to nuke New York or Jerusalem. The Chinese have never promised not to genocide Hollywood and Silicon Valley. Neither the wisdom nor the rightness of an action relies upon the fact that one has never promised not to do it. The balance of power rests upon capabilities, not contracts. And Russia has promised that it will never permit NATO to reach its borders.

In addition to never promising not to invade Taiwan, China has repeatedly vowed to unify the island with the mainland. Would the US Secretary of State argue that China therefore has a right to do so? Because under his own logic, China has a stronger argument than the one he is presenting in favor of NATO expansion.

UPDATE: Yes, China knows exactly what’s happening in Kazakhstan and who is responsible.

China can offer support in the fields of economic cooperation and assistance, as well as counter-terrorism, to help neighboring Kazakhstan restore stability and realize effective reforms and long-term economic development, according to Chinese analysts, as Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and the government thanked Russia and China, as well as other leaders worldwide and heads of international organizations for support offered to the country amid domestic unrest. The situation in Kazakhstan has the clear characteristics of a “color revolution” and the involvement of foreign forces and the “Three Devils” (terrorism, religious extremism and separatism), said Chinese analysts.

China, Xi said, firmly opposes any force undermining Kazakhstan’s stability, threatening the country’s security, and sabotaging the peaceful lives of the Kazakh people. China also strongly rejects any attempt by external forces to provoke unrest and instigate “color revolution” in Kazakhstan, as well as any attempt to harm the friendship between China and Kazakhstan and disrupt the two countries’ cooperation. And, China is ready to provide necessary support to help Kazakhstan overcome the difficulties.

Global Times


No. A Thousand Times No

Ted Cruz thinks people have forgotten his treacherous, self-immolating performance at the 2020 Republican convention. But we haven’t.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said he would “absolutely” consider running for president in 2024, arguing he was in a good position to win the race because he was the runner-up for the Republican nomination in 2016.

“Absolutely. In a heartbeat,” Cruz told The Truth Gazette on Wednesday when asked whether he would consider a run in 2024. “There’s a reason historically that the runner-up is almost always the next nominee.”

Looks like we’ll need to update the meme. DISCUSS ON SG

If At First You Don’t Succeed

Jab and jab again!

Britain is considering giving out fourth Covid vaccines in a bid to stop the surge of Omicron cases, following the lead of Germany and Israel.

The rollout of a second set of boosters is being examined by experts on the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). They will weigh up the levels of immunity granted by the extra jab as well as hospitalisation figures, The Telegraph reported.

Those with weakened immune systems are already entitled to a fourth jab but the elderly and other vulnerable groups could soon be included. The fourth jab would likely come four months after the third if it gets the green light and could be available in the new year.

Professor Anthony Harnden, deputy chair of the JCVI, said: ‘We need to see more data. We are in different circumstances to Israel and we need to see more data on waning immunity and vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation.’ An Israeli health expert, who is sharing findings with the UK, said they are already seeing waning immunity from the third jab, prompting the extra round of vaccinations.

What sort of “safe and effective” vaccine needs to be injected four times in a single calendar year in order to not prevent people from being infected with the disease being “prevented”? If, at this point, you submit to a FOURTH injection, you’re officially retarded. And that’s without even taking into account the subsequent effects of the vaccine-caused microclotting on your brain.


Zuck and Fauci Discuss VEI

Not only is the tide turning, it appears the vaccine narrative may be on the verge of being turned on its head, as Anthony Fauci appears to be going into CYA mode.

Dr. Fauci opens up the possibility that the COVID-19 vaccine could be making people more likely to be infected by the virus. “This would not be the first time, if it happened, that a vaccine that looked good in initial safety actually made people worse. There was the history of the respiratory syncytial vaccine in children, which paradoxically made the children worse. One of the HIV vaccines that we tested some years ago actually made individuals more likely to get infected.”

No, it wouldn’t be the first time. The problem is that this was always the most likely outcome for the mRNA pseudo-vaccines on the basis of the animal testing that resulted in serious Antibody-Dependent Enhancement and Vaccine-Enhanced Infection.


VEI Confirmed in Israel

Karl Denninger runs the numbers and reaches a firm conclusion about the statistical results. Keep in mind that this does not take any adverse effects into account, it’s merely about the relationship between the vaccines and Covid itself:

If you were infected and recovered your risk of a severe outcome, if you got infected, was 0.18% under 39, 1.1% if 40-59 and 7.8% if you were over 60. This doesn’t sound very good for the old people, does it?

Ah, but if you were vaccinated and boosted (best case, right?) what were the odds if you got infected?

0.1% if under 39 (too few events for good statistical power; there was only one), 0.6% if 40-59 (looks pretty good) but 6.2% if over 60. In other words even if boosted the infection rate that went sour on you if you’re old means the jabs are basically worthless compared against prior infection.

And if just vaccinated but not boosted? Comparatively you’re ****ed, right? Or are you?

Uh, for 16-39 your risk there was 0.05% (!!!), for 40-59 it was 0.6% (!!) and for 60+ it was 8.1%.

In other words among infections that matter being boosted had negative or no efficiency when it comes to severe outcomes for everyone under 60!

What if you got jabbed after being infected? This is data I’ve been looking for, and while the data points are thin and thus I’m not happy with the lack of statistical power, well, read it for yourself. Under 40 the risk of severe reinfection was 0.2%, from 40-59 it was 2.4% and for 60+ it was a stunning 10%.


For the other way around, where you got jabbed and then got infected, there were too few events except in one cohort, 60+, to draw good conclusions as there were lots of zeros — but small infection counts. However, the news there isn’t good either in that in the 60+ cohort the severe risk if you got infected was 12.5% (!!!)

Ok, ok you say, but being vaccinated drops the infection risk. Indeed. But it drops it less, except in the 0-2 months since jabbed, than being recovered does. Indeed the loss of immunity from vaccination is nearly linear while for those infected the loss appears to taper significantly after the first six months and residual protection may be of very long duration or even permanent.

Indeed, someone who has been infected (but not jabbed) has a lower person-day risk of reinfection by more than half at one year post-event than someone who has been vaccinated has at four to six months.

The bad news does not end here. While being jabbed after recovery is claimed to produce “superior” results (“hybrid immunity”) the data says that’s flat-out bull****. At 4-6 and 6-8 months the error bands for vaccination after recovery and pure recovery without it cross; there is no statistical evidence that being jabbed after recovery helps and evidence it HARMS BY AS MUCH AS A DOUBLE in terms of the risk of severe outcome.

The other way around is even worse; the evidence is that if you get infected after being jabbed you do not get the same protection as natural infection in that your immunity wanes faster; at 6-8 months you have a LOWER risk of infection if you were not vaccinated before the infection as opposed to being vaccinated and then infected.

In other words this data provides direct evidence of VEI.

It’s official. A study with a sample size much larger than any of the pre-approval studies has clearly demonstrated that the Covid vaccines are officially worse than useless. True, it’s not a proper double-blind study, but then, neither were the pre-approval studies that were tainted by the vaccination of the control group.


In Which Scott Adams is Ripped a New One

Karl Denninger doesn’t exactly hold back in pointing out that neither he, nor anyone else who was correct about the lack of safety and effectiveness that is now being admitted by a number of former vaccine enthusiasts were simply “guessing” about it.

Let’s talk facts eh? None of these are in dispute, by the way.

Coronaviruses circulate in humans all the time. Four of them, to be specific. Two are in the same family as Covid-19; they are beta coronaviruses, as is Covid. One of them, OC43, is believed to have caused a pandemic — in the 1890s. Why doesn’t it now? Because it circulates all the time and most kids wind up getting it very young, since the circulation pattern suggests roughly a four year rotation. That’s right — by the time you’re eight you’ve lived through two rotations through the population of this, and the other three, circulating Coronaviruses.

These four almost never produce any serious problems for children. Neither does Covid. On the data thus far, and we knew this before the first shot went into the first arm in December of 2020, if all 60 million kids under 18 got Covid-19 about 500 of them would die. That’s the data. Likewise, the other 4 common coronaviruses almost never produce serious outcomes. They do produce colds and flus — as does Covid-19 in kids.

All four of these, when someone is infected, produce durable protection against serious and fatal outcomes in the future. The exception is the odd person who is old and has damaged immunity, and their former protection becomes worthless. Yes, occasionally an old person gets killed by OC43 as their prior immunity becomes worthless. Are you noting a pattern here yet or do you already suck at logic?

There is no evidence that once infected by Covid-19 and you survive the infection you are at material risk of a second bad infection. There is a small, but non-zero risk, you can get it again, and my presumption is that if it follows the pattern of other coronaviruses, which tend to run in 3-4 year cycles, you will get it again in a few years. But despite this the odds are well under 1 in 1,000 that said second infection will be serious or worse and with each re-challenge your immunity will become broader and deeper, just as occurs with the other four. There are at this point multiple sets of data with confirmed infection counts well over 1,000 in each data set with no critical or fatal outcomes in any of them and several have had zero reinfections of any sort. In other words there is no evidence that the pattern for the other four coronaviruses that circulate among humans is not what we will see here. Gee, are we detecting a pattern yet or do you really suck at logic?

There has never been a successful and safe vaccine against coronaviruses in man or beast. None. Ever. All have either (1) proved to be short-lived protection, (2) backfired spectacularly and enhanced infection on re-challenge including every animal under test dying on re-challenge, (3) produced a really nasty side effect profile that over time is more dangerous than the disease — or some ugly combination of all three. There are no exceptions. A particular example is a chicken coronavirus where vaccination lasts just long enough for a broiler to reach size and be slaughtered — a bit less than two months. Laying hens must be continually re-inoculated to maintain protection. Attempts to vaccinate cats have killed every cat under test. May I note that felines are one of the animal families that can get and transmit Covid-19? Again, perhaps this is the exception but if it is it will be the first success following an extensive set of failures reaching back decades, many of which produced serious and fatal outcomes. Again: Are you detecting a pattern here yet on the waning of immunity from jabs given the history of prior attempts?

There is no evidence that deleting the “N” protein from the in-use US vaccines in fact eliminates the risk of enhanced disease. That’s the hypothesis underlying the decision to do that but there was no evidence for it in actual human testing, which simply was not done in advance and six months — or in fact a year or two — is too short to find out. Indeed most of the mutation in a coronavirus takes place in the “S” protein which is the part we’re using. This would be reasonably expected to produce evasion over time through natural forces. We did it anyway.

We knew prior to release of these vaccines for general use and their “mandates” that the majority of the antibodies produced were not neutralizing; they were binding. A binding antibody can enhance infection. Given that we had decades of history with the non-durability of neutralizing antibodies with attempts to vaccinate against coronaviruses what is the reasonable expectation for what will happen if that occurs this time but binding antibodies are still present? Proof? No; there was no proof. But what evidence existed that this approach was safe? NONE! Indeed, the evidence, such as it was, all ran the other way although it certainly was not conclusive. We did it anyway.

Prior to general release (September of 2020) there was published a paper characterizing pathogenic potential for the spike protein alone, absent the rest of the virus. That paper demonstrated the potential for direct injury, specifically to the endothelium (the layer of cells that is the inner lining of your blood vessels!) This was a theoretical paper and it set off a bevvy of other studies. One of them, appearing to confirm that hypothesis, was published in pre-print in December 2020 before the shots went into arms. It was subsequently peer-reviewed and passed upon during that process, being published on a formal basis early this year. We jabbed people anyway despite, at that point, having in-vitro (lab) evidence that the spike protein we were causing to be produced in the human body was inherently and separately dangerous without the rest of the virus being present. This paper, standing alone, was enough to call into question the safety of these jabs even if there was no virus at all! We proceeded anyway

So no, it is not guessing to take all of these facts, none of which are in dispute, and conclude that:

There is no reason to believe we can successfully, on a long-term basis, vaccinate against a coronavirus since we never have before in either man or beast.

There is no reason to believe attempting to vaccinate against coronaviruses is safe because in many other instances it was proved to be not, and in some it resulted in fatality of many or all the animals under test upon rechallenge. One specific instance of wildly-enhanced disease occurred in cats, which is a species that we know can become infected by this virus.

There is no reason to believe that deliberately inducing the presence of binding antibodies in a person to this virus, which we knew the vaccines did before the EUAs were issued, would be safe on a durable basis. In fact we had every reason to believe that would be unsafe simply based on what that sort of antibody does on a biological basis. You would in fact be crazily homicidal to deliberately infuse only binding antibodies to this or any other virus into a person.

There was plenty of reason to believe the spike protein, alone, was dangerous even without the rest of the virus and this was known prior to mass-distribution of the jabs. While getting infected certainly could lead to trouble in this regard infection is not certain where vaccination, once you do it, is. Further, the dosing for the vaccines is set to produce much higher levels of spike protein (and thus antibodies) in the body than does natural infection, so any such risk from the spike would be logically expected to be higher from vaccination than natural infection.

As regards children there is not now and never has been an argument for giving them a Covid-19 vaccine. They do not require or benefit from any protection that it might afford on a statistical basis and since we know there are dangers, many of which we have no way to quantify and will not be able to do so for ten or more years it is a rank violation of logic and the Hippocratic Oath, never mind gross negligence and malpractice, to administer or permit to be administered same to kids.

So no, if this turns out to be an utterly insane and disastrous choice to so-state doing this was stupid in advance, as I and some others have done, was not a “wild guess.”

One would have thought the self-styled “Great Predictor” could have seen that one coming. And it is worth pointing out that while his predictions have been completely worthless, The Market Ticker has been the best source of facts, observations, and critical thinking about Covid-19 and the vaccines throughout the entire “pandemic”.


Literal Government by Pedos

The CIA has covered for at least 10 pedophile employees over the last 14 years.

Over the past 14 years, the Central Intelligence Agency has secretly amassed credible evidence that at least 10 of its employees and contractors committed sexual crimes involving children.

Though most of these cases were referred to US attorneys for prosecution, only one of the individuals was ever charged with a crime. Prosecutors sent the rest of the cases back to the CIA to handle internally, meaning few faced any consequences beyond the possible loss of their jobs and security clearances. That marks a striking deviation from how sex crimes involving children have been handled at other federal agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Drug Enforcement Administration. CIA insiders say the agency resists prosecution of its staff for fear the cases will reveal state secrets.

The revelations are contained in hundreds of internal agency reports obtained by BuzzFeed News through Freedom of Information Act lawsuits.

One employee had sexual contact with a 2-year-old and a 6-year-old. He was fired. A second employee purchased three sexually explicit videos of young girls, filmed by their mothers. He resigned. A third employee estimated that he had viewed up to 1,400 sexually abusive images of children while on agency assignments. The records do not say what action, if any, the CIA took against him. A contractor who arranged for sex with an undercover FBI agent posing as a child had his contract revoked.

Only one of the individuals cited in these documents was charged with a crime. In that case, as in the only previously known case of a CIA staffer being charged with child sexual crimes, the employee was also under investigation for mishandling classified material.

Considering a) the way in which “national security” is used to conceal a massive quantity of evils, and b) the fact that the nation has been subject to the largest invasion in human history and its so-called democracy has been rendered entirely fraudulent, it is time to eliminate the concept of “national security” or “revealing state secrets” as a defense against prosecution or the use of evidence in criminal trials.

The Tide is Turning

Scott Adams, a reliable bellwether for the Narrative, is beginning to publicly backtrack on Twitter. The Great Predictor senses that he was completely wrong and is attempting to preemptively cover his exposed backside:

Scott Adams: Note to people who are bad at critical thinking: If we someday learn that getting the vax was a huge mistake, please don’t tell me you knew all along. You are guessing just like the rest of us. Someone will guess right.

Edgar Friendly: That’s it… “guessing”. You might ask why some people have better educated guesses than others. What did they see that you missed.

Scott Adams: I’m the best predictor in the country and I don’t see any way to be certain about the vaccinations.

Yeah, that was a really tough prediction there, Scott. I mean, what are the odds that a global vaccination campaign led by vocal global depopulationists in support of new vaccine technology that has never been successfully tested by massive pharmaceutical companies that insist on complete legal immunity before delivering the vaccines for massive profits might, possibly, perhaps, result in adverse effects for its victims?

If a posturing charlatan like Adams is starting to worry that he got it wrong, that’s a guarantee that plenty of politicians and corporate executives are beginning to realize that they have collectively made the worst mistake of their lives.


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.