Progressive “Riotocracy” and the Great Liberal Death Wish | The Epoch Times

Suspect In Custody After Driving Into Protest And Shooting One In SeattleBy Harley Price

Across Canada and the United States, the disappointingly small groups of peaceful protesters who have supplicated the authorities to be allowed to return to work have been mocked by their political nannies as reckless and selfish yahoos endangering the lives of the rest of us.

Even immediate family members—some of whom have been known to sleep in the same bed—have been officially shamed and fined for violating the protocols of social distancing while walking in the park or kneeling in the pews.

But that was—as our woke millennials are wont to put it—so yesterday. Today, these corona-villains might consider joining the rioters the next time they feel the need for a little physical or spiritual recreation.

Apparently, marching shoulder to shoulder with your revolutionary comrades, bloodying the faces of Asian, Latino, and black shopkeepers trying to defend their livelihood, or clutching looted big-screen TVs to your bosom—all without wearing nitrile gloves or first dousing the teeming, pathogenic surfaces of stolen merchandise or victims of your violence in disinfectant—is virologically riskless when it’s for the sake of equality and justice.

Did I miss the announcement from doctors Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx that massing in violent mobs has now been determined to foster the herd immunity that their unconstitutional lockdown forestalled? And does this mean that ordinary Canadians and Americans have finally been granted permission to leave their domestic prisons, resurrect their moribund businesses, and resume their foundational civil rights of freedom of assembly and worship?

Of course not. In fact, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio was careful to stipulate that the recent rise in COVID-19 cases likely has nothing to do with the massive nationwide demonstrations (after warning solemnly that back-to-work protests in Republican flyover country were socially irresponsible). Is anyone still sufficiently credulous as to believe that holy science is politically disinterested?

Proudly Flying the Double Standard

The tacit approval by politicians and medical “experts” of the rioters’ flouting of the urgent social-distancing edicts tells you something more generally about our rulers’—to be generous, let’s call it—philosophy of governance. It’s an open secret that for decades the perennially enraged left has been formally exempt from the cinching restrictions that apply only to bourgeois, law-abiding deplorables, and the authorities have always been petrified to acknowledge, let alone repeal, this reeking double standard.

So long as you affirm that you’re “for the poor and downtrodden” you have legal immunity to trash and burn the neighborhoods of the poor and downtrodden. Little old ladies who recite their rosaries in menacing proximity to an abortion clinic are sentenced to lengthy prison terms, but Indigenous and environmental pipeline protesters have official license to occupy and blockade public rail lines and bring national transportation networks to a halt for months. The double standard is the patriotic banner, flown with pride, of the progressive army, which preaches diversity and inclusion while everywhere denouncing and censoring non-conformist opinion and speech, and blighting the careers of the insufficiently zealous.

Naturally, progressives oppose “fascism” (about which they are too young and badly educated to know anything); and to show how much they hate it, they use the violent tactics of the SS.

The torching and demolition of America’s “racist” cities—almost every one presided over by Democratic governors, mayors, municipal councils, and police chiefs (many of whom are black, to compound the irony)—by the oxymoronically named Antifa, Black Lives Matter, believe-the-women-(unless-they-accuse-Democrats) feminists, gay and trans activists, queers for open borders, Indigenous national militants, evangelists of abortion, daughters of Gaea, Trump resisters, and all of the assorted victim groups of the intersectional left, reminds us that “racial injustice” is one of an interchangeable and ever-proliferating set of pretexts under which progressives can parade their moral superiority, while enjoying the smashing and pillaging that never seem to tarnish their lustrous reputations for compassion and probity with the beau monde.

The killing of George Floyd was immediately and universally denounced, his tormentors summarily fired from the police force and charged with second-degree murder or aiding and abetting second-degree murder, and political leaders at every level have agreed to enact police reforms.

Since their demands were preemptively met, there was no plausible reason for the “protesters” to have gone on burning and looting for another three weeks, besides the sheer nihilistic joy of it. Anyone not yet impressed by the exuberant illogic and morally indiscriminate devastation wrought by the rioters need only book an iconoclast’s tour of the hundreds of historical monuments they have defaced across the globe, including the effigy of Gandhi, the statue of Winston Churchill, and the Lincoln Memorial: the original anti-colonialists, anti-fascists, and anti-racists, or so it may seem to the un-woke.

But progressive crusaders have never required a credible casus belli. Since the sixties, the left has marched, demonstrated, occupied, blockaded, rioted, burned, and looted with the noxious predictability of black flies in June, all the while anticipating and responding to the next provocation with Pavlovian reflexivity. At least when the Goths and Vandals broke and pilfered stuff in Rome, they desisted once they’d reached satiety, and they didn’t pretend it was for a higher cause.

Protesting ‘Peacefully’

As of last weekend (the numbers increase daily and have probably doubled by now), thousands of businesses across the United States, most of them minority owned, have been destroyed—many of which, already on life-support from the coronavirus lockdown, will never be resuscitated—undoing the decades of hard work, obliterating the life-savings, and beggaring the future existences of their owners (whose black lives apparently don’t matter in the least).

During the past three weeks, in every American city in which significant “protests” occurred, the number of burglaries, shootings, and homicides has increased by between 150 and 500 percent. In the riots themselves, more than 700 police officers have been injured by projectiles (rocks, bricks, cinder blocks, bottles, or Molotov cocktails, often strategically placed by “peaceful” protesters), deliberately run over by vehicular assassins, slashed with machetes, or felled by gunfire, many of whom will be maimed for life.  In St. Louis, a 77-year-old retired police captain was shot and killed by looters—another immaterial black life—while responding to an alarm at a pawn shop. The same day four other officers were shot by a “protester” aspiring to dispatch an entire police line to the other side of time.

So far, at least two dozen people have died in the riots. Ten of the dead were either innocent bystanders caught in the cross-fire, business owners vainly attempting to protect their livelihoods, onlookers deemed insufficiently enthusiastic, or local residents guilty of “privilege” and “systemic racism” because they owned property or had white skin, all executed—10 times, that is, the number of unarmed victims to die in the custody of Derek Chauvin, not a single one of whose lives will be eulogized in a nationally-televised state funeral, or whose unjust deaths will mobilize worldwide demonstrations, or soul-searching conversations about systemic leftist hate and depredation.

Predictably, at CNN, MSNBC, PBS, the New York Times, Washington Post, and the rest of the mainstream media, the canonical euphemism to describe the riots was “peaceful,” while the “rare” and “incidental” violence was attributed to a few nefarious “outside” groups who tried to “hijack” the movement. (Here the words “outside” and “hijack” can be understood in the sense that crime families from out of state sometimes hijacked Al Capone’s getaway car.)

Some officials have blamed the violence on “white supremacists,” of whose presence not even the race-baiting Southern Poverty Law Center could find evidence. According to historian Stuart Wexler, writing in Haaretz, white supremacists typically infiltrate movements such as Black Lives Matter in order to foment a race war in which they hope to “purify” America through “ethnic cleansing.” Indeed, social media, and all the usual established media echo-chambers, falsely claimed to be in possession of a photograph of Chauvin wearing a “Make Whites Great Again” cap at a Trump rally.

It is, of course, a dogma of racialist orthodoxy that resurgent ghosts from the Jim Crow era maraud daily throughout the streets of contemporary America, whereby white supremacist phantoms continue to haunt the imaginations of the likes of Al Sharpton, Jussie Smollett, and the other Masters of the Racial Revels, though they are almost never seen in the flesh. (Oh, and we mustn’t forget “the Russians,” who, according to Susan Rice, were the main instigators of the arson and vandalism. Rice later admitted that she had no evidence for her preposterous claim, but on this theme, when has evidence ever mattered?)

A few observers remained un-woke enough to accept that the trashing, burning, and looting that were taking place before their eyes had indeed been perpetrated by the protesters. But to say so is impious, and so, as the Yemeni owner of a demolished convenience store reasoned, the violence was “okay” and “understandable” in the context of black grievance. Innumerable small and large business owners have agreed that their pauperization was all worth it, leading one to wonder whether they should now restock their empty shelves so that looters can mount a second campaign of theft for racial equality.

By now, every major corporation, from Nike and Google to Walmart, has pledged hundreds of millions of dollars to supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, in direct donation and advertising, on the corporately responsible principle, one supposes, that if you trash our stores and steal our merchandise, we’ll pay you. All of this seems somewhat beyond mere masochism. What we are witnessing are the psychopathologies of a civilization that has been taught to despise itself, and is entreating its progressive masters for euthanasia.

The New American Riotocratic Republic

And how have the brutal agents of oppression responded? As has so often been the case, the arson and looting by the mob has taken place in plain sight of the police, who assumed the posture of either neutral observers or comrades in arms.

Whenever the constabulary deigned to make arrests, the looters and vandals were ceremonially processed and released within minutes, so as not to be overly inconvenienced in their righteous struggle—policing on the sport fishing model, and a perfect reification of the “Big Rock Candy Mountain” hobo utopia, in which “the jails are made of tin,” so “you can walk right out again as soon as you are in.” In cities that imposed curfews, the violators were allowed to continue with their virtuous burning and looting until they were satisfied, as though to interrupt them were to interrupt a celebrant in mid-consecration of the mass (a sacrilege that the COVID-19 social-distancing police never shrank from).

The ritual “taking of the knee” by police chiefs, rank and file officers, and political leaders across the world is the perfect visual emblem of our rulers’ willing capitulation to extortion and mob rule, and more broadly, of our society’s suicidal complicity with the progressive thugs whose ideological imperative is to annihilate it. The only possible excuse for the congenitally tumescent, parasitical, self-serving, and duplicitous institution of government and its monopoly of force is to preserve the social order without which life is indeed nasty, brutish, and short, and guarantee the equal application of the law, without which might is right, and we may as well all emigrate to Mogadishu.

Like the police, America’s civilian rulers have also surrendered with unbidden zeal. In recognition of the justice of their cause, the mayor of Minneapolis peremptorily abandoned the police precinct to the rioters. Not to be outdone in demonstrations of piety, Mayor de Blasio ordered that streets in every one of the five boroughs be renamed after Black Lives Matter, just four days after Washington D.C.’s Mayor Muriel Bowser renamed Lafayette Park “Black Lives Matter Plaza,” marked by the words BLACK LIVES MATTER in 35-foot yellow capital letters (that color being a nice touch if you regard supine cowardice as a virtue).

It’s remarkable that in the blink of an eye Black Lives Matter has been exalted to the rank of sacrosanctity, as though it were the American chapter of Mother Teresa’s Sisters of Charity. Anyone who criticizes BLM (or its message of black persecution) is immediately censored, shunned, or fired.

Naturally, Black Lives Matters supports the entire panoply of progressive causes: unrestricted abortion, non-binary self-identified gender, transgenderism, “dismantl[ing] patriarchal practice,” the “disrupt[ion of] the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure,” the establishment of “a queer‐affirming network … with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking,” “dismantle[ing] cisgender privilege,” and opposing “trans-antagonistic violence.” (After all, even today’s Vandals have been to college.) BLM’S official website is a pretty comprehensive manifesto for the overthrow all the moral norms and institutions of Western Civilization; but I guess we’re all revolutionaries now.

The most instructive symbol of the great surrender, however, is Seattle, one of the perennial spiritual capitals of the Big Rock Candy Mountain hobo utopia. Across from another abandoned police station, six city blocks in Seattle’s municipal center have been ceded by the mayor and governor to the rioters as a fully autonomous state: CHOP, as its rulers now call it, the world’s newest sovereign nation. Around the perimeter of the Republic of CHOP, its “government” has posted armed guards to prevent foreigners from getting in (will border walls be next?).

Pre-CHOP residents who don’t share the revolutionary ideals of their new overlords have had no say over the proceedings. CHOP, or what might be called the Protestor Occupied Territories (POT), is thus a land that has been seized from the original indigenous inhabitants and colonized by its occupiers, but one doubts that the left will denounce it as an apartheid state, demand full democratic rights for the occupied peoples, or the right of return.

CHOP also seems to have revived the great Stalinist tradition of propaganda art. Spray-painted on every available surface are inspiring revolutionary messages including “End America” and “Shoplift Your Future Back.” (When the owner of an auto repair shop and his son detained a CHOP citizen shoplifting his future back and trying to burn down the building, he was confronted by a mob of a hundred shoplifting causists who demanded they let the Good Thief go.)

In this “police-free” land of equality and justice, in what Seattle’s mayor has described as a “block party,” violence, break ins, and robberies have become commonplace. If well-intentioned liberal “idealists” are wondering what the New Progressive Order will look like once it’s been established, they ought to schedule their next holiday in CHOP, assuming its overlords will let them in.

And the Great Liberal Death Wish

All of this leaves the remnant of the sane with the insoluble question: Which is more nauseating? The images of protesters beating up septuagenarian female shop-owners, killing and maiming hundreds of innocent bystanders, torching or trashing whole city blocks, and demonstrating their grinding poverty/anti-capitalist and anti-consumerist bona fides by prioritizing top-of-the-line Nike runners and Gucci handbags on their cleptomaniacal wish lists? Or the contrite acquiescence of the soi-disant “power structure” to their rank criminality and lunatic demands?

The morally preening orgies of contrition and expressions of solidarity by our political, cultural, and corporate leaders, exacted to ensure ideological conformity with the same effectiveness as under Mao, have been rather too numerous and fulsome for optimistic conservatives to any longer discount as merely pandering, self-preservationist, or otherwise insincere.

For 50-odd years, nothing has been done to stop leftist “protesters;” the inescapable conclusion is that the ruling class doesn’t in fact want to stop them. The recent riots should at least have made it clear that the angry left’s heroic struggle against a “repressive authority” amounts to pushing against an open door. In genuinely repressive societies (China under Mao, China under Xi, the former Soviet Union) protesters get shot or dispatched smartly to re-education camps. In post-modernist America, the protesters re-educate their oppressors in the ever-more exquisite points of progressive dogma.

After almost every violent leftist “protest” of late, our political leaders have withdrawn to their own self-sentenced struggle sessions, and emerged from them wearing the nimbus of penitence and progressive enlightenment. The current legislative initiatives to defund the police and re-purpose their budgets to the same welfare programs that have, since the sixties, enslaved blacks a second time to their white Democrat masters, originated from the sober counsel of a screaming, criminal mob.

Many previous progressive desiderata have similarly silted up from the fever swamps of angry demonstrations and were thereafter ratified into law by political leaders, both Democrat and Republican. That’s not “anarchy,” as many on the right have soothingly called it, if anarchy still means unfettered license in the absence of central authority. On the contrary, its progressive theocracy, rule by the same heresy-hunters as have given us campus and media thought police, trigger warnings, censorship of conservative opinion by the Big Tech oligarchy, deplatforming, Maoist shamings and denunciations, and all the other coercive measures by which they punish the slightest deviation from orthodoxy, and in the process repeal the fustian individual liberties and rule of law upon which post-Enlightenment Western democracies were founded.

I said that the recidivist riots of the intersectional left have never required a coherent raison d’etre. But that’s not quite true. Their proudly proclaimed purpose is the shopworn utopian dream of abolishing the corrupt pre-revolutionary moral norms and institutions of the patriarchally oppressed, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Christian-bigoted, and white-privileged Eurocentric civilization they despise, and replacing it with—well, they’ve never deigned to tell us precisely what.

That the feral violence and criminality of the protesting armies never seem to impugn the righteousness of their cause in the media or the ruling class makes it plain that, as a society, we’ve not only accepted the old revolutionary lie that the benignant end justifies the malignant means, but have become oblivious to the fact that not all ends are desirable just because a braying mob says so.

The violence of the George Floyd protesters can hardly be incidental; it’s merely the objective correlative of their core beliefs and aspirations.

Harley Price has taught courses in religion, philosophy, literature, and history at the University of Toronto, U of T’s School of Continuing Studies, and Tyndale University College. He blogs at Priceton.org.

Source: The Epoch Times

Government Officials Globally Expose Themselves and The Big COVID-19 Lie – Solid Proof of Trickery! | YouTube

If you’ve been looking for proof on whether this entire lock-down etc… is just one big lie, then this should open your mind! “How do you know the government/Big Media is lying? They’re moving their lips!”

Source: YouTube

Twitter & YouTube Remove Trump’s Unifying George Floyd Tribute | Trending Politics [click image]

Screen Shot 2020-06-06 at 9.30.15 AMOn Saturday, President Trump gave an incredibly touching and unifying speech to the nation concerning the death of George Floyd. If you’re wondering why you missed it, the answer is simple:

The media refused to give it much attention. Instead, they decided to focus on the violent riots in the streets.

As a result, the liberal media and celebrities everywhere have accused President Trump of being ‘divisive’ and ‘weak’. Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson even made a viral video this week asking Trump ‘Where are you? Where is our compassionate leader?’

Turns out, President Trump has been incredibly unifying and compassionate, but the social media giants are censoring that content.

On Wednesday, the Trump campaign released a video called ‘Healing, not hatred’ which highlighted President Trump’s unifying remarks about George Floyd on Saturday, but it was promptly removed from the left wing platform.

Their excuse for taking the video down was due to ‘copyright’ reasons, but we all know the real reason it was taken down. In our humble opinion, this video displayed perfect messaging on the part of President Trump, and Twitter couldn’t stand to see it go viral.

“Twitter and Jack are censoring this uplifting and unifying message from President Trump after the George Floyd tragedy. The same speech the media refused to cover. Here is the YouTube link.”

As of right now, the video is still up on YouTube. Watch below and share it with EVERYONE YOU KNOW:

“The death of George Floyd in the streets of Minneapolis was a grave tragedy. It should never have happened. It has filled Americans all over the country with horror, anger, and grief,” Trump says in the video.

“We support the right of peaceful protesters, and we hear their pleas,”  added Trump. “I stand before you as a friend and ally to every American seeking justice and peace.”

As you can see, President Trump stood with the PEACEFUL protesters, vowed justice for George Floyd, AND supported our law enforcement!

However, the liberal media has spent all week acting like this speech never happened. They swept it under the rug and they are shielding the truth from the American people.

Source: Trending Politics

The Top Twelve Lies about COVID-19 | Unlock The Lockdown

This article is just a quick run-down of the Top Twelve Lies.

1.   People dropping dead in the streets.

Guardian January

Metro January 31st

The Sun January 31st

This is how the media portrayed COVID-19 at the beginning: a disease so dangerous that people walking along the street suddenly dropped down dead. Virtually all the UK media carried these photos. It’s very odd that in the first two pictures, and variants of them in other papers, those emergency workers have no equipment with them, and appear to be just standing around doing nothing. Are these faked photos? There have been no reports of people dropping dead in the street anywhere since then. And if it had been true in China, the virus would have been noticed very quickly. We now know that the symptoms are indistinguishable from colds, flu or pneumonia. These photos were the start of the Coronapanic lies.

2.   Three Percent Will Die.

The WHO put out this 3% death rate figure early on. You don’t need to be a maths wizard to know that’s one person in thirty. That’s a serious reason to panic. We now know that the death rate is around 0.1%. That’s about one in a thousand, and comparable to seasonal flu. But just as important, the figures are massively skewed towards people around eighty who have at least two existing serious conditions, and are already in a care home: people who have minimal quality of life, and little remaining expectation of life. For younger, healthy people, and younger here can mean under seventy, never mind twenty or thirty, the risk of death is vanishingly small.

3,    Herd Immunity is a Dangerous Idea.

This is one of the most serious corruptions of science ever. You don’t need a degree in Epidemiology to know that epidemics come and go. The very definition of the word implies that. (Conversely, a disease which stays around for many years is called endemic.) You do need to know just a smidgen of Epidemiology to understand why epidemics come and go. It’s not rocket science. When the new disease arrives, everybody is susceptible to it, because it is new and therefore nobody has any immunity. The disease can race through the population, but as it does so it leaves immune people in its wake. As the number of immune people grows, the disease finds it harder and harder to spread. When the number of immune people reaches a certain point (which varies with different diseases) the bug can find no new people to infect, so the bug itself effectively dies. That point is called herd immunity. It is the only way to defeat a new virus. But see number 4.

4.   We Need a Vaccine to Give us Herd Immunity.

Vaccines work by creating artificial herd immunity, but that’s no better than natural herd immunity. And the simple fact is, as everyone knows, we don’t have a vaccine. How long will it take to make one, test it properly, and roll it out? Eighteen months? Three years? Never? In any event, even if we use a vaccine before proper safety testing, it will still take longer than it does to reach herd immunity naturally. (And note that the Common Cold is also often caused by some other Coronaviruses. Still no sign of a vaccine for any of those.)

5 Lockdowns Work.

The evidence here is very, very weak. It is common sense that they must have some effect. But we have New York, with a hard lockdown and massive deaths, while Tokyo with a minimal lockdown has hardly any. Or Sweden with a very mild lockdown having a lower death rate than Britain with a draconian one. Or Spain and Portugal, which together make up the Iberian Peninsula, having massively different death rates. There is another factor, or factors, involved here, and the mass media seem to have no concern as to what they might be. Happily there are some scientists who do seek to explain the differences. Several factors have been put forward with good evidence:

  1. Vitamin D plays a huge role in the immune system, and variations in deficiency certainly play a part, at least in individual cases. In fact, it is negligent of the Government not to have promoted Vitamin D supplementation on a large scale.
  2. Flu vaccines also play a role in causing worse outcome with Coronaviruses. The mechanism is called vaccine-induced viral interference. Naturally those who make vaccines are not keen for you to know about such undesirable side-effects.
  3. Obesity is a negative indicator, which will partly explain New York’s high death rate. One of the oddest Covid statistics to date is that out of the small number of deaths in Japan, no less than seven are Sumo Wrestlers!

One could tease out many other factors, but not one comes close to the Grand Deal-Breaker in Epidemiology, which is immunity. Immunity is the principal reason people do not get sick with any disease. Hence the primary factor in differential death rates must be how long different countries had the virus before they realised. As the infection travelled through populations, confused with colds and flu, it was steadily building immunity. China has a truly miniscule number of deaths given its huge population. The virus there was on the rampage right through Winter Flu Season, before they realised there was something new. When they did, they locked down, and the lockdown appeared to be very effective; but only because they were already close to herd immunity. The countries surrounding China, which have a great deal of intercourse with it, have similarly low death rates (Vietnam, nobody at all!) How and when the virus got into other countries is difficult to unravel now; but one should be aware that Wuhan Airport is a major hub, with flights all over the World. We can reasonably infer that Norway, for example, was infected early, yielding the much lower recorded deaths later. Such a conclusion is borne out by the fact that, having now eased its lockdown, cases are still going down. In other words, there is no sign of a “Second Wave”. After a tight and effective lockdown preventing transmission, and also therefore preventing the growth of immunity, there should indeed be a second wave. The lack of one points very strongly to previously acquired immunity. (In all of this New York remains the ultimate outlier, and I’m no more prepared to attempt a complete explanation of NY statistics at this stage than anybody else.)

6.   Lockdown Does Not Cause More Deaths than it Saves.

The leaked figure of 150,000 lockdown-caused deaths has never been refuted by the UK Government. It is only common sense that with the NHS shut down to almost everyone, there will be more deaths from other causes. Also more suicides, more domestic violence, and the array of problems that increase mortality when poverty increases. The economic crash is going to have a big effect there. And do we regard the suicide of a healthy 20-year-old as equivalent to the death of an ailing 85-year old? Lockdown is not a One-Way Street when it comes to saving lives; more likely a Wrong-Way Street.

7.     Being Infected May Not (or Does Not) Make You Immune.

This is a truly bizarre assumption to make about any specific infection. (Note that the Common Cold, which is endemic, is caused by a number of different viruses.) This “fact” was allegedly based on some people who seemed to be infected twice. But the extreme difficulty of distinguishing between Colds, Flu, Covid19 and Pneumonia means this was always a ridiculous conclusion to reach. And if it were true it would be a one shot kill of the “Race for a Vaccine.” Vaccines only work because they stimulate the immune system in the way a natural infection does. If Covid19 did not provoke a normal immune response, any vaccine would be useless.

8.    Having Covid Means Having Serious Symptoms.

In the beginning of this sorry saga, the most serious symptom, as noted in Lie 1 above, was instant death. Now we know that it mostly has no symptoms at all, or presents like a Common Cold. All the World’s highly-paid and endlessly-promoted “experts” somehow didn’t notice this.

9.    Masks Work.

If they do, why can’t we all wear them and get back to normal? If they don’t, why are we ever recommended to use them? The effectiveness or otherwise of masks has been a controversial matter for months. Some Doctors have said that healthy people wearing them outside of a clinical setting is definitely a bad idea. Is the mask controversy just another way to ramp up fear and confusion?

10.   Two Meter Social Distancing is Necessary.

There is no good science behind this. In Norway, with its incredibly low death rate, they use one metre. And there is never a reference to whether you are indoors or out. If you breathe out virus indoors, it has little choice but to hang around in the room for a while. If you are outside in fairly still air, which has a speed of about 2 metres per second, the virus you breathed out 2 seconds ago is already 4 metres away. And because the air you breathe out is always warmer than the surrounding air, and warm air rises, that potentially virus-laden air will rise up outside with no ceiling to stop it. So two metres is not necessary in Norway, but it is in England, whether you are in a small room or on a breezy beach. Is this fear-mongering nonsense, or science? It is certainly not the latter.

11.    Money has Nothing to do with Any of This.

The influence and mega-bucks of Bill Gates and Big Pharma is supposedly not skewing the debate. Bill Gates’s donations to Prof Lockdown Ferguson’s Imperial College, or to the WHO, make no difference, and Bill Gates’s desire to produce seven billion doses of vaccine does not give him a financial interest. Bill Gates is a nice guy who knows a lot about computer viruses, so we should all look to him as our Saviour from this virus. I fancy there’s more logic in Alice in Wonderland.

12.   The Destruction of Basic Human Rights is a Price Worth Paying.

People being under virtual House Arrest, with Freedom of Movement, Freedom of Association, Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Work, Freedom to attend School, all curtailed, is OK? The introduction of mass personal surveillance is a good thing? If a foreign invader threatened our Rights like that we would fight for them, and accept casualties in the process. Why are we suddenly turning that logic on its head, and deciding to give up Rights to (possibly) save lives? Do we all fondly imagine that we will soon have our Rights back? History shows that Rights are generally hard won, and once lost they are very hard to get back. And if you think you still have Freedom of Speech, try as I and others have, to put across a view that is different to the Government. Yes, you can get it across to a few. But if it reaches many more, Google, or YouTube, or Facebook will soon censor it. If you are reading this article, it is because you are one of a small number, meaning the article is still below the censor’s radar, or the popularity level that triggers censorship.

In those wonderful days before Covid19, we all knew that Politicians, Journalists and Salesmen are inveterate Purveyors of Porky Pies. Now these same people are regarded as Saints and Saviours, with absolutely nothing but our best interests and well-being in their hearts. It is a fact, meaning a real one, not a fake one, that I can think of no topic ever that has had so many utterly bizarre lies told about it. It is also a fact that I cannot think of any matter where politicians around the World all suddenly started braying like donkeys with the same awful hoo-ha. And also a fact that I cannot think of any occurrence which has simultaneously destroyed human rights and wrecked the economy across the entire Globe. Is it not odd that all of those three extreme observations should apply to the very same little virus? If anyone can’t see a problem here, it can only be that Coronapanic has totally obliterated their thought processes.

Source: The Lockdown

Media Analysis: Bias & Accuracy

MediaMapBy John David Van Hove, Editor

Here are some facts about the mainstream media: ownership, founders, leadership, circulation and their particular political bias. These news sources are listed in our order of preference.

The Wall Street Journal

  • Founded in 1889 by journalists, Charles Dow, Edward Jones & Charles Bergstresser who established Dow Jones & Company which led to the founding of the newspaper
  • Owned by News Corp & Rupert Murdoch; Bought for 5b; Also owns Dow Jones & Co
  • Circulation: 2.8m
  • Conservative in bias, but uses minimally loaded words in headlines
  • Owns Medford & Ashland Tidings
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the Wall Street Journal Right-Center biased due to low biased news reporting in combination with a strongly right biased editorial stance. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting rather than High, due to anti-climate, anti-science stances and occasional misleading editorials. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wall-street-journal/ 

Bloomberg News

  • Owned by Michael R. Bloomberg, Bloomberg LP
  • Former Editor of The Economist, John Micklethwait is the Editor-in-Chief
  • Involved in the C40 Climate Leadership Group
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Bloomberg Left-Center biased due to story selection that slightly favors the left. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High, due to not covering Michael Bloomberg and his Democratic Presidential rivals during the primaries. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bloomberg/

Forbes

  • Founded in 1917 by B.C. Forbes and his partner Walter Drey
  • Chairman & Editor-in-Chief Steve Forbes
  • CEO is Mike Federie
  • In 2014 a Hong Kong based investor group purchased a majority stake in Forbes Media
  • Forbes coverage of China has been criticize due to Chinese ownership
  • Published controversial articles by Dinesh
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Forbes Right-Center biased based on story selection that tends to favor the right and the political affiliation of its ownership. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High due to some misleading or false stories related to climate science. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/

The Epoch Times

  • Owned by the Epoch Media Group which also owns NTD
  • Non-Profit 501 (c)3
  • First Published in NY in 2000.
  • Founded by John Tang and Chinese-American Falun Gong practitioners
  • Publishes in 21 languages in 35 countries
  • When reporting on China they do reflect a strong anti-communism bias
  • Strong Pro-Trump bias
  • Media Bias Fact Check listed as false an article entitled “Did China’s Communist government create the novel coronavirus in a laboratory and release it into the world as a deadly bioweapon (Note: LIF tends to agree with The Epoch Times on this matter)
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Epoch Times borderline Questionable and Right Biased based on editorial positions that consistently favor the right. We also rate them factually Mixed due to the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of pro-Trump propaganda and conspiracy theories as well as failed fact checks. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/ 

The Hill

  • Owned by News Communications, published by Capitol Hill Publishing
  • Published in Washington DC since 1994
  • Features editorial commentaries that provide a reasonably balanced group of columnist
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Hill Least Biased based on editorial positions that are currently balanced and news reporting that is low biased. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High, due to previous opinion columns promoting unproven claims. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-hill

Roll Call

  • Owned by FiscalNote
  • Founded in 1955 reporting news of legislative and political maneuverings on Capitol Hill
  • Merged with Congressional Quarterly in 2009
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Roll Call Least Biased based on straightforward, factually based news reporting. We also rate them Very-High for factual reporting due to strong sourcing and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/roll-call/

Business Insider

  • Owned by German Publishing House of Bold, Die Welt and Fakt,  Axel Springer acquired Business Insider for $442m
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Business Insider Left-Center Biased based on story selection that leans left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a reasonable fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/business-insider/

Fox News Channel

  • Owned by Fox Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of 21st Century Fox; also owns National Geographic both the U.S. and international versions)
  • Fox News began in 1996; $2.7b year revenue
  • Fox News is available in 90 million homes
  • Ranks 1st with 2.5m viewers; Fox News Channel best show
  • Fox News as network for the unrepresented, for outsiders, in direct competition with CNN
  • Fox News Rise due to Roger Ailes, CEO
  • Fox News Bill O’Reilly & Ailes ousted for sexual harassment charges; Megyn Kelly left
  • Fox News Anchors like Tucker Carlson & Sean Hannity lead the way calling CNN “fake news”
  • Fox News Lachlan Murdoch, CEO looking at a future beyond Trump (since Rupert Murdoch retired)
  • Fox News attacked all media that didn’t have a right-wing basis
  • Fox News more propaganda; a mouthpiece for Trump
  • Fox News & White House revolving door with more than twenty people (John Bolton was a Fox News contributor BEFORE becoming Trump’s National Security Advisor)
  • Fox News Trump identity crisis; Fox poll said 51% of viewers wanted him impeached
  • Fox News 18 times Trump criticized Fox News
  • Fox News sick of being attacked by Trump
  • Fox News not producing unbiased coverage
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories that later must be retracted after being widely shared. Further, Fox News would be rated a Questionable source based on numerous failed fact checks by hosts and pundits, however straight news reporting is generally reliable, therefore we rate them Mixed for factual reporting. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

New York Post

  • Founded in 1801 by Alexander Hamilton (One of the Founding Fathers of the United States), the New York Post (NY Post) is a daily tabloid newspaper from New York City. According to an article published by the NY Times, titled “THE NEW YORK POST HAS A LONG HISTORY”, they describe how under Hamilton’s ownership the paper covered “shipping news, engaged in political crusades even if it meant the loss of advertising revenue
  • Later owners were Poet William Cullen Bryant who kept the NY Post for 50 years, followed by railroad magnate Henry Villard (1878), Oswald Garrison Villard (1917), Thomas W. Lamond, and Cyrus H. K. Curtis (1920). Under Curtis’ ownership the NY Post followed a conservative editorial policy until 1936.
  • When David J.Stern acquired the paper in 1936, they became editorially more liberal. Dorothy Schiff bought the New York Post in 1939, which she controlled until 1976, and under her ownership, The Post was liberal as it supported the civil rights movement and opposed the Vietnam War. In 1942, Theodore Thackrey became editor and The Post switched from a broadsheet paper to a tabloid.
  • In 1976, Rupert Murdoch, the owner of News Corp, acquired The New York Post and in 1988, Murdoch sold the paper to Real estate developer Peter S. Kalikow. When Kalikow lost the paper to bankruptcy in 1993, Rupert Murdoch once again purchased the paper and continues to own it today. Since Murdoch took over the paper, The Post has been known for their over-the-top sensational headlines.
  • Overall we rate the New York Post on the far end of Right-Center Biased due to story selection that typically favors the Right and Mixed (borderline questionable) for factual reporting based on several failed fact checks. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/

Trending Politics

  • Founded in 2019 & Co-Owned by A. Ferretti, R. Nosbish, Jack Murphy and Clayton Keirns
  • Pro-Trump bias to balance the Left’s negative reporting
  • Media Bias Fact Checks rates Trending Politics a borderline Questionable, Right Biased source based on story selection and editorial positions that routinely favor the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to use of poor sources, occasional promotion of conspiracy theories and a failed fact check. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/trending-politics/ 

Daily Caller

  • Founded in 2010 by Tucker Carlson, a libertarian political pundit and Neil Patel, former advisor to VP Dick Cheney
  • 30m page views per month
  • Publishes controversial science articles
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the Daily Caller strongly right biased based on story selection that almost always favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks. The Daily Caller is a source that needs to be fact checked on a per article basis. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-caller/ 

Washington Post

  • WAPO began in 1887
  • Circulation: 1m daily via digital
  • WAPO is owned by Jeff Bezos who paid $250m via Nash Holdings LLC cash; He also owns Amazon.com & Blue Origin
  • Didn’t buy as an investment, but had an important role to play in democracy
  • Doubled its web traffic and became profitable within 3 years
  • Newsroom of 900 people operate with full independence says Bezos
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Washington Post Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that moderately favors the left and factually High due to the use of proper sources and a reasonable fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/

Politico

  • Owned by Capitol News Company, Robert L. Allbritton, Publisher & Executive Chairman
  • Founded by two former Washington Post journalists, John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei.
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Politico Least Biased based on balanced coverage of news stories and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/politico/

The New York Times

  • NYT began in 1851
  • NYT is owned by Sulzberger family & Carlos Slim
  • NYT Chairman Arthur Gregg “A.G.” Sulzberger is the sixth member of the Ochs/Sulzberger family to serve as published since 1896
  • Founding Editor Henry Jarvis Raymond and former banker George Jones
  • Political Position of the NYT “We shall be Conservative, in all cases where we think Conservatism essential to the public good; and we shall be Radical in everything which may seem to us to require radical treatment and radical reform.”
  • Raymond was prominent in forming the Republican Party during the 1850’s
  • Early Investors included the first president of Wells Fargo & Company and director of American Express.
  • NYT looks at the issues from a progressive perspective and is regarded as “liberal”. According to a Pew Research Centers’ media polarization report  “the ideological Placement of Each Source’s Audience” places the audience for the New York Times as “consistently liberal.” Further, since 1960 The New York Times has only endorsed Democratic Presidential Candidates.
  • Donald Trump has frequently criticized The New York Times on his Twitter account. Trump labels the NYT as “fake news”, “naive”, “dumb”, and “the failing New York Times.”
  • Media Bias Fact Check shows the New York Times has made false claims in reporting, but always makes corrections to those stories as soon as new information is available. Further, failed fact checks occurred on Op-Ed pages and not straight news reporting.
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the New York Times Left-Center biased based on word and story selection that moderately favors the left, but highly factual and considered one of the most reliable sources for news information due to proper sourcing and well respected journalists/editors. The failed fact checks that occurred were on Op-Ed’s and not straight news reporting. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/

Los Angeles Times

  • Founded in 1881 and owned by Biotech billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong
  • Owner has spent decades trying to cure cancer; richest doctor in the world; Born to Chinese parents; acquired a handful of other California newspapers
  • Moderately loaded headlines
  • Endorses Democratic candidates
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates LA Times, Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that favor the left and High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/la-times-los-angeles-times/

USA Today

  • Owned by Gannett
  • Owned by Gannett Company
  • Circulation: 1.7m
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates USA Today Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that slightly favor the left and factually high due to proper sourcing. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/usa-today-2/

Newsweek Magazine

  • Owned by Etienne Uza and Johnathan Davis
  • Bought in 2013
  • Also owns The Daily Beast, Latin Times and Medical Daily
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Newsweek Left Biased based on story selection that favors the left and Mixed for factual reporting due to multiple failed fact checks by IFCN fact checkers. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek/

Time Magazine

  • Owned by Marc & Lynne Benioff, Salesforce)
  • Paid $170m in 2017
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Time Magazine Left-Center biased based on story selection that mostly favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. This update moves Time further to the left with their bias rating score increasing from 3.75/10 to 4.75/10, which is on the cusp of Left and Left-Center Bias. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/time/

CNN

  • Division of Warner Media News and Sports; owned by Turner Broadcasting System which is a division of Time Warner and founded by Ted Turner in 1980’s)
  • AT&T owns Warner Media & Time Warner
  • CNN is available in 90 million homes; Ranks 22nd in viewers with less than 1m
  • CNN how manyJeff Zucker, Chairman & CEO
  • CNN most used digital news and information outlet in world
  • CNN was originally an outlet without political bias
  • CNN began in 1980’s
  • CNN Airport Network pays airports for exclusive access to display their content and provides funds for TV equipment
  • CNN wants to be a big and important part of the conversation
  • CNN fired multiple Trump-friendly commentators
  • CNN produced 20 events to debate issues
  • CNN no live and uncut political rallies
  • CNN less news reporting, more punditry, more round tables, more horse-race politics, more talking heads, more interviews and interviews yelling at each other which makes the news more confusing for the viewer
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates CNN left biased based on editorial positions that consistently favors the left, while straight news reporting falls left-center through bias by omission. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to several failed fact checks by TV hosts. However, news reporting on the website tends to be be properly sourced with minimal failed fact checks. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

HuffPost

  • Owned by AOL; Owned by Verizon
  • Verizon Wireless Owned by AT&T
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates HuffPost Left-Biased due to story selection that favors the left and Mostly Factual in reporting due to proper sourcing with a few failed fact checks. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/huffington-post/

The Atlantic

  • The Atlantic first published in 1857
  • Founded by Ralph Waldo Emerson & Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
  • Circulation: less than .5k
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/

The New Yorker Magazine

  • Founded in 1925 and owned by the Newhouse family, Conde Nast Inc, a subsidiary of Advance Publications; Also owns Vogue, Vanity Fair, Gentlemen’s Quarterly, Architectural Digest & Wired
  • Circulation 1m
  • Uses strong emotionally loaded headlines; Endorses Democrats
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the New Yorker Left Biased based on story selection and editorial position that favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-yorker/

NETWORKS

ABC News

  • American Broadcasting Company Owned by Disney Media Networks and The Walt Disney Company
  • Flagship programs include: ABC World News Tonight with David Muir, Good Morning America Nightline, Primetime and 20/20, Political Affairs Program This Week with George Stephanolpoulos
  • Founded in 1945
  • 37% liberal, 41% mixed and 21% conservative
  • Removed a fake Syria bombing video on 10/14/2019
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates ABC News Left-Center biased based on story selection and word choices that moderately favor the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a reasonable fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/abc-news/

NBC News

  • Division of NBCUniversal News Group, a subsidiary of NBC Universal is Owned by Comcast, Noah Oppenheim, President
  • Founded in 1940 as National Broadcasting Company
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates NBC News Left-Center biased based on story selection and word choices that moderately favor the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a reasonable fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/nbc-news/

MSNBC

  • Owned by Comcast, Brian L. Roberts, CEO
  • MSNBC is available in 96 million homes
  • MSNBC ranks third with 1.75m viewers; Morning Joe is highest rank show
  • Left-wing alternative to Fox News
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates MSNBC Left Biased based on story selection that consistently favors the establishment left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to news hosts and the website producing 3 pants on fire claims. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/msnbc/

CBS News

  • Owned by National Amusements, a subsidiary of ViacomCBS, Susan Zirinsky, President
  • Founded in 1929
  • Flagship programs include: CBS Sunday Morning, 60 Minutes and 48 Hours, Face the Nation. CBS Radio News broadcasts on 100% of radio stations in the USA. CBSN
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates CBS News Left-Center biased based on story selection that moderately favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cbs-news/

PBS News Hour

  • Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 signs by Lyndon B. Johnson formed the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and National Public Radio (NPR)
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates PBS NewsHour slightly Left-Center Biased based on story selection that slightly favors the left and Very High for factual reporting due to in-depth, well sourced information and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pbs-news-hour/

Associated Press

  • Founder & Published Moses Yale Beach started AP in 1846
  • Created by five New York newspapers
  • Multinational, not-for-profit news agency and owned by its contributing newspapers, radio and television stations in the US
  • Reporting on the Trump administration the Associated Press usually maintains a neutral voice,
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the Associated Press borderline Left-Center Biased due to left-leaning editorializing, but Least Biased on a whole due to balanced story selection. We also rate them Very-High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/associated-press/

Gannett Company

  • Parent organization New Media Investment Group
  • Large newspaper chain headquartered in McLean, Virginia (same town as the CIA)
  • Largest total daily circulation; 3.2b revenue
  • Owns USA Today, Detroit Free Press, The Arizona Republic, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and 100 prominent newspaper in small, midsize and large cities
  • Bought by GateHouse Media which published 144 daily newspapers, 684 community publications and 569 local-market websites in 38 states

CANADA

CBC News (Canada)

  • Canadian Government Funding (66%) The CBC Board consisting of 12 members appointed by the Independent Advisory Board.
  • Founded in 1936 by an Act of Parliament, a division of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
  • Republishes stories from credible sources such as Associated Press & Reuters
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates CBC Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that leans slightly left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cbc-news-canadian-broadcasting/

The Globe and Mail (Canada)

  • Owned by The Woodbridge Company Ltd and controlling shareholder of Thomson Reuters division of Reuters News
  • Founded in 1844
  • Endorses slightly more conservative candidates
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Globe and Mail slightly Right-Center biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on proper sourcing. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-globe-and-mail/

UNITED KINGDOM

Reuters (UK)

  • Owned by Woodbridge Company Limited, Thomson Reuters and Reuters Group
  • World’s leading international multimedia news agency based in London, UK
  • Numerous Pulitzer Prizes for reporting
  • Thomson Reuters Trust Principles require journalists to maintain freedom from bias
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates Reuters Least Biased based on objective reporting and Very High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information with minimal bias and a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/

BBC (UK)

  • BBC governed by a Board of Directors consisting of 13 members. Deputy Governor of the Bank of England David Clementi is the Chairman. Financed by consumer license fees on broadcasting receivers (televisions and radios).
  • Founded in 1922 and operating as a Royal Charter, the British Broadcasting System
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the BBC Left-Center biased based on story selection that slightly favors the left and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bbc/

The Times & Sunday Times (UK)

  • Owned by NewsUK, Acquired by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation in 1981
  • Founded in 1785
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Times and Sunday Times Right-Center biased based on story selection and editorial positions that favors the right and High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-times-of-london/

London Evening Standard (UK)

New Statesman (UK)

  • Owned by GlobalData PLC
  • Founded in 1913 by socialist Fabian Society
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the New Statesman Left Biased based on story selection that mostly favors the left and High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-statesman/

The Guardian (UK)

  • Owned by Guardian Media Group & Scott Trust Ltd. Founded in 1921
  • Slight to moderate liberal bias and uses loaded words
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates The Guardian Left-Center biased based on story selection that moderately favors the left and Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High due to a couple of failed fact checks.  https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/

Financial Times (UK)

  • Published in UK owned by The Nikkei, a Japanese news and financial information company
  • Media Bias Fact Check rates the Financial Times Least Biased based on balanced reporting and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/financial-times/

Source: Media Bias Fact Check

This is what mind control looks like. This is Operation Mockingbird | YouTube

 

https://youtu.be/_RHKmOovMfM

Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: This video is a most interesting expose’ of various memes repeated ad nauseam by the mainstream media (MSM) with the intent of casting doubt about any news sources via social media. How many millions of times will the news anchors repeat their scripts before the idea is deeply hammered into the minds of their viewers? Watch it and for a moment imagine who’s pulling the strings behind these news anchors. Obviously, they are not reporters doing their own thinking. Furthermore, when I first watched this YouTube a few weeks ago it was a different version than this which has now implanted images of Fox News. Mainstream media is manipulation, nothing more.

Source: YouTube 

Opposition to Decoupling From China Misses the Problem of 5G | The Epoch Times

FILE PHOTO: A 3D printed Huawei logo is placed on glass above displayed US flag in this illustrationJohnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: After reading this expose’ I realized why the race for 5G dominance is also a race for which political system will prevail – capitalism or communism. China has taken the lead in 5G and already dominates the marketplace. Unless the USA steps up along with its telecommunications partners and has the ability to compete in a free market with China, it will lose the battle for freedom as well. This does not imply that I wholeheartedly support 5G especially with regards to the untested health and safety issues. Already we know that millimeter radiation damages human health, but the industry refuses to study or mitigate these. It’s a grand experiment which has already resulted in tens of thousands of deaths which were falsely attributed to COVID-19.

By Bonnie Evans

As calls to decouple U.S. industries from dependency on manufacturing in China are growing, President Donald Trump has helped prepare the ground for a shift from China by taking a more skeptical approach to relations with the regime in Beijing than his predecessors.

While globalists are pushing back against the efforts to decouple, the key telecommunications technology of 5G shows the limitations of their approach, according to one expert.

Opposing Views

The argument for protecting the deeply intertwined U.S.–China economic relationship is widely supported in some circles.

Last December, former World Bank President Robert Zoellick, who served the George W. Bush administration as U.S. trade representative, asked a gathering of the U.S.–China Business Council, “Are you ready for this?”

“The 20th century painted a shocking picture of industrial age destruction; do not assume that the cyber era of the 21st century is immune to crack-ups or catastrophes of equal or even greater scale,” Zoellick said.

“You need to decide whether you think the United States can still cooperate with China to mutual benefit while managing differences, and if so, how.”

The Financial Times said that Zoellick’s words “captured the fears—particularly within parts of Washington’s economic and foreign policy establishment—that U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war against Beijing has paved the way for an irreversible ‘decoupling’ of the world’s two largest economies.”

Zoellick was responsible for completing the negotiations that brought China into the World Trade Organization.

Zoellick’s views are echoed by other trade and China specialists.

Harry G. Broadman, an economist who has worked in key U.S. government, international organization, private sector, and academic roles during his 30-plus-year career, wrote in Forbes in September 2019 that decoupling from China potentially presents “worldwide negative spillover impacts.”

Of those consequences, Broadman suggests, “technological bifurcation, which could fundamentally jeopardize harnessing global benefits from advances in science and technology,” is one of the riskiest aspects of taking the United States out of China.

In plain English, Broadman’s argument is that without globalization, which is largely underpinned by the U.S.–China relationship, technologies go their own way, developing standards and specifications for the regions in which they emerge, rather than under a globalized standard common throughout the world.

5G Domination the Danger

“He’s mistaken,” Robert Spalding said, referring to Broadman’s views on technological bifurcation. Spalding is a retired Air Force brigadier general and architect of the U.S. National Security Strategy, which named China as an adversary. He is now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington, and author of the recent book “Stealth War: How China Took Over While America’s Elite Slept.”

The real danger, Spalding told The Epoch Times in an extensive interview, is in the ongoing struggle for dominance in fifth-generation—5G—mobile technology and standards that are already beginning to change how data is collected and used around the world.

“The U.S. was the first to develop the smartphone in 4G,” Spalding said. As a result, “we dominate the information market.”

But as the world moves into 5G, the risks are greater if the “concept of open data” and “open data markets” of those 4G networks are maintained. In Europe, the open data concept has already “created concern for privacy protection.”

In China, however, open data markets create a global opportunity.

“In the hands of China,” Spalding said, open data “lets the state take hold of power that Google and Amazon have.”

The “state” in China is led and run by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

“The ability of these companies to pinpoint your location and the things you’re doing and buying is incredibly powerful and counter to privacy concerns and counter to the principles of our liberal democracies,” Spalding said.

Spalding pointed out that “as Android and Apple become less of dominant players in 5G, now Tencent and Alibaba and DJI and Hikvision can begin to dominate that data space. So we move from a world centered on the U.S. to one centralized on Baidu and Tencent.”

All five companies are Chinese technology companies with ties to the CCP. Alibaba and Tencent generally rank in the top 10 internet companies in the world by market capitalization.

“That’s why he’s mistaken [about the problem of technological bifurcation]. It’s positive if we move to a data system that is focused on privacy and security and sovereignty and deploying secure 5G,” Spalding said.

Referring to Broadman, Spalding said that “what he’s advocating is that China dominate the technological space.”

China Sets Standards

Already, Spalding said, 3GPP, the umbrella body under which the key telecommunications standards organizations in the world operate and coordinate, is heavily dominated by China.

Since American network equipment manufacturers “are not expected to survive,” that leaves only four companies in the world that will make the networking equipment for the 5G future.

Those companies are Ericsson, Nokia, Samsung, and China’s Huawei—all subject to the standards that are being so heavily influenced by Chinese technical specifications.

Functionally, therefore, Spalding points out that even though Ericsson and Nokia are Swedish and Finnish respectively, and Samsung is South Korean, they end up building the same system as Huawei.

“Essentially,” Spalding said, “everybody is building a Chinese network based on open data, not on a secure network. That’s why he’s incorrect. His theory promotes China,” Spalding said.

This means, Spalding said, that China’s “acquisition of intelligence” and “ability to influence societies” is greatly enhanced both in China and abroad, including in the United States.

Statistics from the Institute of Electronics and Electronic Engineers support Spalding’s claim.

In a March 17 post titled “Strategy Analytics: Huawei 1st among top 5 contributors to 3GPP 5G specs,” Alan Weissberger reports that “even though there are more than 600 member companies participating in 3GPP, their 5G specification process is actually led by only a few leading telecom companies. … New research from Strategy Analytics … finds that 13 companies contributed more than 78% 5G related papers and led 77% of the 5G related Work Items and Study Items.”

Of those 13, the top five are, in order, Huawei, Ericsson, Nokia, Qualcomm, and China Mobile.

Free Versus Centrally Resourced Trade

“By allowing China to be in the global trading system, you’re actually undermining the foundational premises” of that system, Spalding said. That global trading system has “a market-based approach to both capital allocation and trade.”

“China is not a market-based economy,” Spalding said. China, Spalding has said earlier, is not “a centrally planned economy, but it is centrally resourced.”

“When the state is providing resources and capital to a company, that’s not a market-based solution,” he said.

“Prices are set by China, not by the market.

“If you really want to have a free trading system … then China can’t be a part of it because they don’t believe in it.”

Source: The Epoch Times

COVID-19 Hoax: Citizen Reporters

https://youtu.be/aVFC5n-KnuA

Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: So why all the hooplah about long lines and overcrowding in the hospitals in New York and around the country? These citizen reporters take their cameras to numerous hospitals to find them like ghost towns. You decide if we’re still overreacting and being used by the media.

Source: YouTube & Miss Dana Ashlie

Corona: creating the illusion of a pandemic through diagnostic tests | No More Fake News

HarmonicConvergence2020Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note:  As we’ve begun to suspect that COVID-19’s testing protocols are seriously flawed, here’s some evidence of the vagueness of their testing techniques and why this pandemic may be as fraudulent as the testing. 

By Jon Rappoport

Nailed them, with their own words.

In this article, I’ll present quotes from official sources about their own diagnostic test for the coronavirus. I’m talking about fatal flaws in the test.

Because case numbers are based on those tests (or no tests at all), the whole “pandemic effect” has been created out of fake science.

In a moment of truth, a propaganda pro might murmur to a colleague, “You know, we’ve got a great diagnostic test for the virus. The test turns out all sorts of results that say this person is diseased and that person is diseased. Millions of diseased people. But the test doesn’t really measure that. The test is ridiculous, but ridiculous in our favor. It builds the picture of a global pandemic. An excuse to lock down the planet and wreck economies and lives…”

The widespread test for the COVID-19 virus is called the PCR. I have written much about it in past articles.

Now let’s go to published official literature, and see what it reveals. Spoiler alert: the admitted holes and shortcomings of the test are devastating.

From “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel” [1]:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.”

Translation: A positive test doesn’t guarantee that the COVID virus is causing infection at all. And, ahem, reading between the lines, maybe the COVID virus might not be in the patient’s body at all, either.

From the World Health Organization (WHO): “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) technical guidance: Laboratory testing for 2019-nCoV in humans” [2]:

“Several assays that detect the 2019-nCoV have been and are currently under development, both in-house and commercially. Some assays may detect only the novel virus [COVID] and some may also detect other strains (e.g. SARS-CoV) that are genetically similar.”

Translation: Some PCR tests register positive for types of coronavirus that have nothing to do with COVID—including plain old coronas that cause nothing more than a cold.

The WHO document adds this little piece: “Protocol use limitations: Optional clinical specimens for testing has [have] not yet been validated.”

Translation: We’re not sure which tissue samples to take from the patient, in order for the test to have any validity.

From the FDA: “LabCorp COVID-19RT-PCR test EUA Summary: ACCELERATED EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA) SUMMARYCOVID-19 RT-PCR TEST (LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA)” [3]:

“…The SARS-CoV-2RNA [COVID virus] is generally detectable in respiratory specimens during the acute phase of infection. Positive results are indicative of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA; clinical correlation with patient history and other diagnostic information is necessary to determine patient infection status…THE AGENT DETECTED MAY NOT BE THE DEFINITE CAUSE OF DISEASE (CAPS are mine). Laboratories within the United States and its territories are required to report all positive results to the appropriate public health authorities.”

Translation: On the one hand, we claim the test can “generally” detect the presence of the COVID virus in a patient. But we admit that “the agent detected” on the test, by which we mean COVID, “may not be the definite cause of disease.” We also admit that, unless the patient has an acute infection, we can’t find COVID. Therefore, the idea of “asymptomatic patients” confirmed by the test is nonsense. And even though a positive test for COVID may not indicate the actual cause of disease, all positive tests must be reported—and they will be counted as “COVID cases.” Regardless.

From a manufacturer of PCR test kit elements, Creative Diagnostics, “SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus Multiplex RT-qPCR Kit” [4]:

“Regulatory status: For research use only, not for use in diagnostic procedures.”

Translation: Don’t use the test result alone to diagnose infection or disease. Oops.

“Non-specific interference of Influenza A Virus (H1N1), Influenza B Virus (Yamagata), Respiratory Syncytial Virus (type B), Respiratory Adenovirus (type 3, type 7), Parainfluenza Virus (type 2), Mycoplasma Pneumoniae, Chlamydia Pneumoniae, etc.”

Translation: Although this company states the test can detect COVID, it also states the test can read FALSELY positive if the patient has one of a number of other irrelevant viruses in his body. What is the test proving, then? Who knows? Flip a coin.

“Application Qualitative”

Translation: This clearly means the test is not suited to detect how much virus is in the patient’s body. I’ll cover how important this admission is in a minute.

“The detection result of this product is only for clinical reference, and it should not be used as the only evidence for clinical diagnosis and treatment. The clinical management of patients should be considered in combination with their symptoms/signs, history, other laboratory tests and treatment responses. The detection results should not be directly used as the evidence for clinical diagnosis, and are only for the reference of clinicians.”

Translation: Don’t use the test as the exclusive basis for diagnosing a person with COVID. And yet, this is exactly what health authorities are doing all over the world. All positive tests must be reported to government agencies, and they are counted as COVID cases.

Those quotes, from official government and testing sources, torpedo the whole “scientific” basis of the test.

And now, I’ll add another, lethal blow: the test has never been validated properly as an instrument to detect disease. Even assuming it can detect the presence of the COVID virus in a patient, it doesn’t show HOW MUCH virus is in the body. And that is key, because in order to even begin talking about actual illness in the real world, not in a lab, the patient would need to have millions and millions of the virus actively replicating in his body.

Proponents of the test assert that it CAN measure how much virus is in the body. To which I reply: prove it.

Prove it in a way it should have been proven decades ago—but never was.

Take five hundred people and remove tissue samples from them. The people who take the samples do NOT do the test. The testers will never know who the patients are and what condition they’re in.

The testers run their PCR on the tissue samples. In each case, they say which virus they found and HOW MUCH of it they found.

“All right, in patients 24, 46, 65, 76, 87, and 93 we found a great deal of virus.”

Now we un-blind those patients. They should all be sick, because they have so much virus replicating in their bodies. Are they sick? Are they running marathons? Let’s find out.

This OBVIOUS vetting of the test has never been done. That is an enormous scandal. Where are the controlled test results in 500 patients, a thousand patients? Nowhere.

The test is an unproven fraud.

And, therefore, the COVID pandemic, which is supposed to be based on that test, is also a fraud.

“But…but…what about all the sick and dying people…why are they sick?”

I’ve written thousands of words answering that question, in past articles. A NUMBER of conditions—none involving COVID, and most involving old traditional diseases—are making people sick.

Sources:
[1]: (link)
[2]: (link)
[3]: (link)
[4]: (link)


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Source: No More Fake News

Dems Preparing to Spend $5 Million on Ads Blaming Trump for Coronavirus | Trending Politics

President Donald Trump walks to the Oval Office at the White House on Tuesday Dec. 17, 2019, during a visit with President Jimmy Morales of Guatemala. (Doug Mills/The New York Times)Johnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: When COVID-19 first hit the shores of America I had wondered if the Democrats, who are still angry about losing the 2016 election and failing to impeach President Trump, would in an act of desperation attempt to blame and frame Trump for his handling of the Coronavirus crisis through the media (despite his noble efforts to address the situation). True to their lack of humane principles, these Democrats are raising the bar on inappropriate political behavior in a time of national crisis.

According to the Washington Post, dark money Democrat groups are getting ready to unleash a multi-million dollar campaign where they hope to convince voters that President Trump is to blame for the coronavirus.

Despite the fact that China new about the coronavirus months ahead of time and did nothing to notify the rest of the world, Democrats think that President Trump is to blame.

Check out what the Daily Wire reported:

The Washington Post reports that Pacronym, a Democratic mega-group focused on the 2020 presidential election, will spend at least $5 million in the first offensive attack of the 2020 presidential campaign season, airing commercials in key battleground states blaming Trump for ignoring the growing coronavirus threat.

“This is a public health issue and a national security issue, but it’s also a public policy issue and thus a political one,” one Democratic official, associated with Pacronym, told the Post.

The ads will air in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and North Carolina — all states where Democratic votes are key, and all states that are leaning, at least slightly, towards Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election. Around half the ads — $2.5 million worth — will air before the end of April. The rest will air in July, around the time both parties hold their nominating conventions.

Based on early clips, released on Twitter, Pacronym will focus on a largely debunked story about President Donald Trump “eliminating” the White House pandemic office.

The Daily Wire continues:

Several news organizations have reported on the issue and nearly all agree that the office was downsized, not eliminated, and at the request of then-national security advisor John Bolton, not President Trump. Bolton felt that the pandemic office, along with several other national security task forces, had become bloated; some had grown by dozens of employees under the Obama Administration, many of whom, Bolton felt, were not necessary.

If “Pacronym” sounds familiar, that’s because it is directly affiliated with the Democratic activist group, Acronym, which helped fun the now-infamous Shadow, Inc. — the organization responsible for snagging the contract to build an app for the Iowa caucuses. The app failed miserably, sending the caucuses into a week-long tailspin and delaying results from the first-in-the-nation primary contest for days. The app malfunctioned when reporting results from caucus sites and, in some cases, failed at the outset, leaving caucus-goers unable to register their preferences.

Acronym and Pacronym have ties to both the Obama campaign, through Pacronym board of directors member David Plouffe, who served as former President Barack Obama’s chief campaign strategist, and to Hillary Clinton’s ill-fated 2016 operation, through a number of high-level advisors and operatives. The Acronym, Pacronym, and Shadow, Inc., employees who built the Iowa caucus app came straight off Clinton’s 2016 tech team.

Spokesman for the Trump campaign Tim Murtaugh has spoken out about the report, stating that blaming President Trump for the coronavirus is “laughable.”

“It is laughable that his allies would launch this attack when Americans can see for themselves through daily public briefings that President Trump and his team are on the case and have been so since before Joe Biden even woke up to the situation,” Murtaugh said.

Source: Trending Politics