Dawning of the Corona Age: Navigating the Pandemic by Johnny Freedom | Liberty International


Author’s Note: 
Five months of intensive research, collating 670 research and news sources, are compacted in this succinct, readable and entertaining 167-page compendium about the “pandemic”. It provides a comprehensive overview for those with an open mind, still willing to learn, to expand perspectives far beyond media tidbits. This is the Dawning of the Corona Age. 

May we remove our masks – and blindfolds – to take notice of what is actually rapidly happening around us to navigate how we can still “live free in an unfree world”.

This newly released book is dedicated to You. Thank you for educating yourself, “thinking twice before you think”, calmly sharing your insights, acting wisely and thereby reclaiming authority over your life! Enjoy the first chapter of thirty-two below. 

“A compelling exploration far beyond the immediate impacts of the “pandemic”, Dawning of the Corona Age imagines how our human world may be altered long into an uncertain future. “

$10 PDF ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=H7ZVUNGC58QE2

$25 PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=QCQQL3JUTVURE (includes PDF Version with 670 Live Links)

$25 AMAZON PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FSR3NJG

THE PANDEMIC:
Season 1, Episode 1 

1. Preface & Introduction

Like a television series straight out of science fiction films, such as, V for Vendetta, Pandemic and The Matrix, the mainstream media narrative relentlessly broadcast at “We the People” seemed at first as surreal and as strange as an episode of The Twilight Zone. 

Now, suddenly, and apparently without warning, we are living in a strange hybrid between George Orwell’s novel 1984, Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and The Matrix. Science fiction has now become real.

George Orwell wisely observed that, “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” In 1958, Aldous Huxley warned that, “Pharmacology and propaganda will make the masses love their slavery. As the world is forced into accepting greater and greater levels of government control in all areas of life, remember that nothing in politics happens by chance. There is a science to creating empires.” 

As  the lead character Orpheus revealed in The Matrix film, “The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.”

These perspectives reflect a deeper sense of what may be happening in our world today. For those open-minded enough to consider the truth as more important than convention and its lies, that sobriety is more essential than distorted states of consciousness, that the Earth and all of its natural wonders are more beautiful than any virtual reality, this book may just break open the possibility of a transformation of our understanding of this “pandemic”. 

In truth, this may be the “crowning” of a “new age” of consciousness emerging from the rubble of an old world dying around us. A “Corona” age may very well be on the horizon if we act from a higher understanding of our own existence as true human beings instead of from our limited perspectives of material existence.

For those with the courage to question authority, to question even our present sense of reality, this book is for you.

“Do not believe in what you have heard; do not blindly believe in traditions just because they have been handed down for many generations; do not believe in anything just because it is rumored and spoken by many; do not believe merely because a written statement of some old sage is produced; do not believe in conjectures; do not believe in that as truth to which you have become attached from habit; do not believe merely
the authority of your teachers and elders,
or news sources or books.

Question all authorities and truisms.

Decide for yourself what is the veracity of your perceptions.
Ponder what is not true. Even more so, ponder what is true, deeply and continuously.”
~ Buddha

$10 PDF ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=H7ZVUNGC58QE2

$25 PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=QCQQL3JUTVURE (includes PDF Version with 670 Live Links)

$25 AMAZON PRINT ORDER LINK: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FSR3NJG

THE PANDEMIC: COVID-19, Season 1, Episode 1

  1. DumbedDownPreface and Introduction (PDF)
  2. Seven Known Strains of Coronavirus (PDF)
  3. COVID-19 Did Not Naturally Occur By Animal to Human Contact
  4. China’s COVID-19 Coverup
  5. Faulty Computer Simulations & Projections
  6. Skepticism of Mainstream Narratives & Projections
  7. Herd/Individual Immunity, Lockdowns & Quarantines
  8. The Immune System is Your Primary Defense
  9. How Contagious is COVID-19?
  10. “Exosomes” as a Natural Release of the Human Body
  11. Masks or No Masks?
  12. Invalid Testing & Inconclusive Diagnosis for COVID-19
  13. Inflated Death Rates & Asymptomatic Cases
  14. Hydroxychloroquine is an Effective Treatment
  15. Emerging & Effective Treatment Protocols
  16. Questioning the Need, Safety & Efficacy of a Vaccine for COVID-19
  17. Dangers of Vaccines Laced with Toxic Materials
  18. Germ Theory is the Wrong Approach, Look to the Biome

THE LOCKDOWN: Season 1, Episode 2

  1. CoronaWorldInternational, National & State Declarations of Emergency
  2. COVID-19 & The 5G Factor
  3. Total Surveillance State & The Right to Privacy
  4. Legal Authorities for U.S. Public Health Officials & State Governors
  5. Stimulus Bills Are Fast Tracks to Socialism & U.S. Bankruptcy
  6. Chinese Coverup & Propaganda
  7. Undeclared War Between China & United States
  8. Global Goals of the Pandemic
  9. The New World Order
  10. Big Pharma Funding Regulatory Agencies Providing Oversight & Developing Public Policy
  11. Internet Censorship & Medical Fascism
  12. The Global Health Protection Racket
  13. The Future Ain’t What it Used to Be

THE CORONA AGE: 2020 & BEYOND, Season 2

  1. BecomeEnlightenedDawning of the Corona Age

APPENDIX

How To End White Privilege | YouTube

Brandon Tatum, Prager U, doesn’t forgive you for your white privilege. How can he forgive you for something that doesn’t even exist? So, where did the notion of white privilege come from? Who does it benefit? And who does it hurt? The answers might surprise you.

Professor Peggy McIntosh, Wellesley College Women’s Studies wrote an article about 46 white privileges she thought she had. Our conclusion is that the notion of “white privilege” does nothing good for white students and nothing good for black students.

While acknowledging your white privilege may make you feel good with a virtue bonus of separating you from other white people who don’t. acknowledge it.  Furthermore, what makes white people feel good often makes blacks angry.

Fifty years after the Civil Rights movement the narrative is still that black people are oppressed. How can this not create a victim mentality especially among blacks?

Let’s be real.  White privilege depends on the person. White privilege is a way that the left/liberal/progressive class divides America by race. White privilege is all theory and complete nonsense. Deal with people one on one and don’t lump them all together by race. Try it. It works.

Source: YouTube

Black Lives Matter Don’t Care About Black People | SOTS

12302430_16x9_xlargeBy Amir Pars

I will lose many friends over what I’m about to say.

I will possibly be called a racist or even a white supremacist (even though I’m a brown man, who’s been beaten to a pulp by neo-Nazis wearing steel toed boots).

But maybe, just maybe, the fact that I am getting 100% of my information from the black scholars in the picture – The Great Thomas Sowell, Glenn Loury, Shelby Steele, John McWorther, Coleman Hughes, Kmele Foster and Thomas Chatterton Williams, allows me some room for thought?

I’ve been watching the narrative play universally over the heinous killing of George Floyd, and the complete and utter lack of facts about African Americans in The US has been infuriating.

Unfortunately, anyone who doesn’t submit to the dominant narrative will be called a heretic, a racist, a whites supremacist etc. Still, I can’t stop myself.

Black Lives Matter don’t care about black people

Want evidence? Name me a single time – just once – when they’ve protested against black people being killed by other black people? Whether in America or elsewhere?

Why is this relevant? Because the biggest cause of death for black men aged 15-45 in USA is… other black men. Compare to white people, where it’s traffic accidents for the younger portion and heart attacks for those over 35.

Or how about the black lives in Sudan, East Timor, Libya? Why do we only ever hear from BLM when it’s a white person killing a black person?

Speaking of which – imagine if white people started doing the reverse. Imagine every time a white person was killed by a black person, there’d be protests, riots, looting and social media campaigns. First thing to notice is that it would be more frequent, because African Americans kill more white people in the US than white people kill African Americans. Now what? Should we really start applying the race card every time there’s a murder involving more than one pigmentation? Where will it end?

Police killings

The video of the murder of George Floyd is so visceral, by showing the casual evil with which officer Derek Chauvin kills George Floyd. People are rightly outraged, and no one can honestly defend the officer, who rightly has been arrested and hopefully will spend his remaining years behind bars (although the prosecutor has been idiotic in moving the case from 2nd degree to first degree murder – a burden of proof they will most likely fail to provide).

But… The only reason people are up in arms about these is that the social media and MSM attention focuses disproportionately on these incidents when the victim is black and the officer isn’t. Don’t believe me? Let me prove it:

You’ve all heard of Tamir Rice – a 12 year old black boy who was murdered when brandishing a toy gun. It was all over the news, there were riots and marches, hashtags and universal condemnation all over the media.

But how many of you have heard of Daniel Shaver? A white man who was showing his friends a scoped air rife used to exterminate birds who entered his store, and was killed for this?

You may remember the case of Sam DuBose, a black man who was shot dead for driving his car away from from the police. The exact same thing happened to before that to Andrew Thomas, a white man driving away from the police. None of you have heard of him.

Alton Sterling was a black man shot dead by the police when reaching into his pocket for his wallet – a travesty. The same thing happened to a white guy named Dylan Noble. Sterling made national headlines, none of us heard a word about Noble. Loren Simpson was a white teenager who was shot dead by the police in eerily similar circumstances as George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. You’ve not heard of the former, but demanded justice for the latter. You’ve not heard of James Boyd, Alfred Redwine, Brandon Stanley or Mary Hawkes.

But you’ve heard of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. Because the only times police killings make the news is when the victim is black and the officer isn’t.

Here are the FBI, NCJRS and BJS statistics:

For every 10, 000 black people arrested for violent crime, 3 are killed by the police. For every 10,000 white people arrested for violent crime, 4 are killed by the police.

In 2019, 49 unarmed people were killed by the police. 9 were black. 19 were white.

The likelihood for a black person being shot by the police is as high as being struck by lightning. Yet, we are seeing riots, every single post on Instagram and Twitter is in support of Black Lives Matter and denunciation of police in America…

“Systemic Racism” / “Institutionalised racism”

Sound good, don’t they? Such powerful words… and completely inaccurate. First, let’s see what the claims being made are:

Both insinuate built-in racism within various official institutions (police, law, governments etc). Yet, when they are challenged, by asking the proponents to provide *evidence* for these, nothing is provided. Name one single law that is targeting exclusively black people. Just one. There isn’t one. If the police is “systematically” anti-black, explain how it is possible that 20% of the Police Force in America is black (African Americans in America constitute roughly 14% of the population, meaning that blacks are *overrepresented* within the police force!)? Now, imagine how incredibly racist it is to say that the 100, 000 plus black police officers are too stupid to know that they are working inside and within a racist institution? That really is racism. And none of them have come out and said anything??? None of them have gone on 60 Minutes and said “We are being trained to be racists”? Seriously?

How about governments? Well, let’s leave aside the fact that America just had a two-term black president (whose second name was Hussein, by the way). Some of America’s worst run cities have black mayors, black governors and majority black councils. Look at two of the worst cities in America to be black in:

Baltimore and Chicago. Why is it that a place where the people in power are black can be *worse* for the African American Community, than cities that aren’t run by black politicians? This is a knock-down argument.

Disparity

People often look at the economic disparities between blacks and whites, and claim it to be evidence for institutionalised racism. It says something about the power of a narrative, when it has been debunked decades ago – by BLACK ECONOMISTS (like The Great Thomas Sowell) – yet the myth persists.

First of all, at no point in human history has any two groups of people had the same level of wealth or income as each other. It would be an absolute miracle to expect that people with different backgrounds, cultures, histories, values and ethics to have the same level of wealth.

This is even true within so called races – compare for example Black Americans (generational) vs Black Immigrants… particularly the ones from West Indies (Jamaica, Barbados etc.).

You couldn’t tell these people apart, just by looking at them, and whatever racism is in place for one group must by definition be applied for the second group. But what they have is completely different values and work ethics (the Jamaicans arriving in the US does so commonly to achieve greater heights than what he or she can in their home country). Whatever level of systemic racism exists, they are subjected to it as much as the African American.

Yet, already in the 1970’s (!!!), when racism was far more prevalent than it is today, Black Americans from the West Indies were earning 58% more than the Black American whose generations go back centuries in the United States. How could that be, if there’s supposed to be such a thing as “systemic racism”?

Disparities are only proof of disparities. Just because Group X doesn’t have the same as Group Y, doesn’t mean that it’s explained by racism. And why does this so called “White Supremacy” only run against one group of Black Americans? Why doesn’t it run against Asian Americans, who out earn White Americans by over 60%? Why doesn’t it apply to Jewish Americans? Or Indian Americans, all of whom earn more than… White Americans??

Maybe there’s something else going on…?

In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan published his report “The Negro Family: The Case For National Action”, where he saw that African American households were 25% single mothers – a frightening statistic that would have devastating consequences. Since then, Jim Crow laws and Red Lining have all been removed from the books, Martin Luther King Jr. and The Civil Rights Movement made tremendous strides and we’ve now even had a black two-term president.

But, today, black households with no paternal figure, and only a single mother constitute SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT of all black households in America!!! SEVENTY FIVE!!!!

Now you tell me, which is the better explanation for young black children ending up in a life of crime – the lack of a father figure, or the mythical, non-explainable entity known only as “institutional racism”, which for some reasons doesn’t apply to Nigerian immigrants, to black immigrants from West Indies, to Indian people, to Jewish people, to Asian Americans…?

Criminality

“Why are blacks being disproportionately imprisoned? There’s a racist Prison Industry Complex!”

The key word here is “disproportionately”. Because it most certainly is true that African Americans make out the majority of prisoners in America, but what is the evidence that this is disproportionate? It’s non-existent.

Let’s look at the stats:

Black Americans constitute roughly 14% of the population in America, yet they commit 50% of all the murders. But, this is misleading – because it’s not the elderly, nor the children nor the women who commit the murders. It’s almost exclusively the young men (15-40). That constitutes about a fourth of the black population, which means that about 3.5% of the American population are responsible for 50% of all the murders!

Read this again: 3.5% of Americans are responsible for 50% of all murders.

You will find similar astonishing figures for drug related crimes, armed robberies, breaking and entering and gang violence.

So, even though it is true that black people make up the majority of the prison population, the incarceration rates are only proportionate against the crime rate, not the population.

History of slavery, Jim Crow and Red Lining

“Well, that maybe so, but it’s because of the history of slavery and Jim Crow!”

I don’t doubt the good intentions of those making these arguments, but they don’t actually see how it is a classic case of Racism of Lower Expectations.

No one has been able to provide a logical link between historical racism and the plight of people today.

First of all, what’s unique about racism in America (and Britain, for that matter) is that these countries abolished slavery when they did! They were among the first countries in the world to do so, and America even fought a bloody civil war to implement the 13th Amendment. Almost every country in the world practiced slavery, and there are many – particularly in Subsaharan Africa – who still do to this day.

And it most certainly is true that racism didn’t end with slavery, and evil practices such as Jim Crow, segregation and Red Lining were practiced until the 70’s. But – and here is the most astonishing fact of all – African American’s had *more* wealth and less unemployment during those times than today, when such practices have been abolished and are rightly considered moral evils.

Now, before anyone makes the nonsensical claim that “You’re saying we should oppress them then, because they had it better!?”, let me explain that correlation does not mean causation. But just as facts don’t care about feelings, reality won’t comply with narrative.

“America is a White Supremacist society!”

This is one of the most egregious claims out there. First of all, compared to what? Show me a country where blacks are a minority, but still get to be elected presidents, have more than 50 Mayors, congressmen and women, run city councils and have had multiple presidential candidates. Show me one.

America (and Britain) are two of the least racist societies on earth and in history. For god’s sake, look at the response from the murder of George Floyd! Just look at the outpouring of support for black people, the universal condemnation of racism from exactly all corners of the political spectrum, the complete solidarity from every white person with a social media account.

“Black Lives Matter”

This is a big one. Because I don’t know of many organisations who care less about black lives than Black Lives Matter. 93% of all killings of black people are done by other blacks – BLM are completely silent on this. BLM has never – not a single time – had a march or campaign black people being killed en massé in places like Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia or Libya.

Instead, what they have done is to have chants like “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” (about the police), which inspired a lunatic in Dallas to murder 3 police officers.

During the current riots, a 77 year old, black former Police Captain – David Dorn – was murdered by rioters. BLM has not said a word.

BLM reject Martin Luther King Jr.’s sentiment that people should “…be judged based on the content of their character, not the colour of their skin”. If you’ve actually listened to the “I have a dream” speech, that line is the one which got the loudest cheers and applauses. BLM believe people who aspire to apply this principle of colour blindness are racists.

Conclusion

I can go on and on. I’ve provided my sources below, and I can point to the works of economists and criminologists and historians for further data. But I don’t [think] it will matter – the narrative is too strong, and people are too emotionally invested. Facts don’t stand a chance.

People are so keen to use the tragic murder of George Floyd to wave their anti-racism badges and flags. It makes them feel good. Black friends of mine, who are incredibly successful in their fields, are talking about how they’ve been victims all their lives, even though they are some of the luckiest people who have ever lived, regardless of race.

All I ask of you, if you’re reading this (and I doubt many will, certainly not to the end) is to ask yourself “What if what Amir is saying is true?”

That’s all I can hope for.

References:

Source: SOTS

Protests Expose Lockdowns And Social Distancing Shaming As A Farce | The Federalist

Lockdown-Farce-1024x705By Tristan Justice

It was just more than a week ago that crowds gathered at Missouri’s Lake of the Ozarks to enjoy the Memorial Day weekend. With the celebrations however, came sharp criticism over the lack of social distancing featuring fearmongering elites shaming those relishing the springtime sunshine.

Former Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill was among those quick to demonize the apparent selfish behavior as “embarrassing” for her home state.

“Hope none of them have parents fighting cancer, grandparents with diabetes, aunts and uncles with serious heart conditions. Because clearly they could care less,” McCaskill wrote on Twitter.

When it comes to the massive protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death in police custody however, McCaskill is cheering them on, retweeting somber images of the demonstrations and calling Missouri’s decision to deploy the National Guard to Washington D.C. after days of rioting as “disgusting.”

The densely crowded protests would soon draw the attendance of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, both over the age of 65 putting them at higher risk of serious complications from the Chinese virus.

The sudden disregard for social distancing from avid lockdowners expose the extreme measures that tanked the nation’s economy and destroyed the nation’s psyche to be nothing more than deeply unserious methods to combat a virus that poses nearly no danger to low-risk groups.

More than 40 million Americans have now filed for unemployment. An estimated 100,000 small businesses have already permanently shut down. About 1 in 3 Americans are experiencing signs of clinical anxiety and depression. Thousands of others have put of critical health procedures so hospitals could build adequate capacity for an overwhelming surge in cases that never came in most of the country.

Yet while thousands gather in protest against police brutality across the country, no one seems to care about the ongoing public health pandemic after chastising those who dared break social distancing rules to reopen their states and reclaim their livelihoods.

In today’s America, churches can’t host socially distanced sermons including more than ten people but a violent mob can burn it down in the name of social justice. States had already made their priorities clear providing bars and casinos with greater freedom than houses of worship it deems nonessential, illustrating just how far we’ve strayed from faith even as millions of Americans desperately need it.

Floyd’s funeral is slated to take place in Houston on June 9 and is expected to draw an attendance of thousands, including prominent figures such as former Vice President Joe Biden. Many in the rest of the country however, were barred from properly saying their goodbyes to lost loved ones because the government declared it too dangerous, even this week and in the coming days.

But the media doesn’t care. Before downplaying the violence from days of lawless anarchy terrorizing a dystopian nation because the message fit their own progressive agenda, legacy media painted the anti-lockdown protestors as heartless grandma killing rubes. These Americans, the media said, were reckless, selfish, dangerous, suicidal, racist because they could spread the virus to black people, and didn’t deserve medical attention. One would be hard pressed to find that kind of reporting on even larger protests today, because it doesn’t exist.

If nothing else is clear in the aftermath of these time-defining protests, it’s past time to end the lockdowns. Shut down the nursing homes, insulate the at-risk population and move on.

Source: The Federalist

The Moral Authority of the Lockdown Fetishists Is Gone. Thank the Protestors and Rioters | Ron Paul Institute & MISES

nyc-riotBy Ryan McMaken

Six weeks ago, when thousands around the nation took to state capitols to protest the human rights abuses inflicted by coerced “stay-at-home orders,” lockdown supporters reacted with sanctimonious outrage.

Declaring the protestors to be “covidiots” who failed to appreciate the virtue and necessity of police-enforced lockdowns, news outlets and lockdown advocates on social media declared the protests would cause outbreaks of disease, and nurses declared the protests were “a slap in the face” to those trying to treat the disease. One political cartoon featured an image of an emergency room nurse saying “see you soon” to anti-lockdown protestors.

Now, with far larger numbers of protestors amassing in larger groups, we hear none of the lofty moralism coming from the media or lockdown enthusiasts in social media. Yes, there are still some token attempts to express worry over how the riots and protests of recent days might spread the disease. But the tone is quite different. Concerned over COVID-19 are now phrased in the formula of ” if you protest, take these measures to minimize risk. ” It’s all very polite and deferential to the protestors.

Politicians like Kamala Harris have even joined the protestors in the streets, thus doing what she demanded other avoid just a few weeks earlier. Where are the nurses denouncing these protests as a “slap in the face”? They’re nowhere to be seen.

Of course, those who support the current protests, but oppose last month’s protests, claim there is no equivalence. Many would likely say “we’re now protesting against people being killed in the streets!” followed by “those other protestors just wanted haircuts!”

The reality, of course, was far different. Most of those who oppose the COVID lockdowns are well aware that the lockdowns kill. They lead to severe child abuse, to more suicide, and to more drug overdoses. They lead to denial of medical care because lockdown edicts have ridiculously labeled many necessary medical procedures to be “elective.” Lockdowns have rendered tens of millions of Americans unemployed while robbing people of their social support from family and community groups. Lockdowns increased police abuse and harassment of innocent people who were guilty of no crime but leaving their homes or trying to earn a living.

Lockdown advocates, however, declared all of this to be “worth it” and demanded that their ideological opponents just shut up and “#stayhome.”

Lockdowns for Thee, But Not For Me

But now the current spate of protests and riots have made it clear that lockdowns and social distancing are all very optional so long as the protestors are favored by a leftwing narrative.

While the pro-lockdown/anti-lockdown conflict can’t be defined by any neat left-right divide, it is nonetheless largely true that the most enthusiastic advocates of COVID lockdowns are found on the left side of the spectrum.

And that’s why things have now gotten so interesting. It was easy for the pro-lockdown left to oppose protests when those protest were seen as a rightwing phenomenon. But now that the protests are favored by the left, then it’s all perfectly fine outside of a handful of politely expressed “concerns” that protests might spread disease.

The left’s about-face on the sacredness of social distancing will have significant effects on the future enforcement of stay-at-home orders and social distancing laws.

After all, on what grounds will governors, mayors, and law enforcement officers justify continued attacks on religious groups who seek to assemble in the usual fashion? If one group of people are allowed to gather by the hundreds to express one set of beliefs, why are other groups not allowed the same?

Politicians will no doubt soon invent new rationales for this inconsistency. Indeed, we already have one case. New York mayor Bill DeBlasio has come right out and said people who protest racism are allowed to assemble. DeBlasio likes them. But how about religious gatherings? DeBlasio doesn’t like those, so they’re still prohibited.

The Moral Authority of the Lockdown Advocates Is Gone

The current riots and protests have accelerated this sort of disregard for coerced social distancing, although things were already headed in this direction anyway.

The lockdowns initially were imposed with so little resistance because the legacy media and government bureaucrats managed to convince a sizable portion of the public that virtually everyone was in grave danger of death of serious disability from COVID-19. Many people believed these experts.

By May, however, it had become clear the doomsday scenarios predicted by the official technocrats greatly overstated the reality. Certainly, there were many vulnerable groups, and many died of complications from disease, just as many died during the pandemics of 1958 and 1969. But there’s a difference between a spike in total deaths, and a civilization-stopping plague. The experts promised the latter. We got the former. And we would have gotten the former even without lockdowns. Those jurisdictions that imposed no general lockdowns — such as Sweden — never experienced the sort of apocalyptic death predicted by lockdown advocates. Yes, they had excess deaths, but Sweden’s hospitals never even went into “emergency mode.” In the US, those states that imposed limited lockdowns for only a short period never experienced overloaded hospitals and overflowing morgues and was claimed would happen.

Could this yet happen in the future? It’s certainly possible, but how will we know? The lockdown advocates have already been so wrong about masks, about fatality rates, about the models, and about so much more, that we have no way of knowing if we should believe them the next time they show up and swear “this time, the situation is truly dire!”

But we’re not out of the lockdown woods yet. This fall, politicians and other lockdown advocates are likely to start up again with demands that new laws be passed requiring people to stay home, shut down their businesses, and otherwise put life on hold in the name of stopping COVID-19.

But it’s unlikely the public will fall for the same routine twice in a row. At least not to the same extent. The reaction of many will likely be “we’ve heard this song and dance before. Besides, social distancing didn’t matter to these experts very much back during the riots. Why should we believe them now?”

It’s a good question.

Source: Ron Paul Institute & MISES

Memo to My Liberal/Progressive Friends | Liberty International

SABy Johnny Liberty, Author of the Global Sovereign’s Handbook

“The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in the mind at the same time.” ~ F. Scott Fitzgerald

So sorry, but my “liberal/progressive” friends who blindly hate Trump have lost their minds (and their souls in the process).

My friends are so deceived by digesting and parroting years of negative, liberal/leftist media (e.g, New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc) that they are no longer able to think outside the box of their own mental conditioning. 

The critical thinking skills of many of my liberty/progressive friends are impaired. They do not think for themselves. They do not read news sources from a conservative perspective. They do not read Trump’s tweets directly. Thus they are blind to what’s actually going on.

My friends have willingly given up their sovereignty and now complain daily about everything beyond their control. They believe they are victims instead of empowered individuals with the power to make a difference.

My friends place their daily angst on Trump and use him as a convenient scapegoat for all that’s wrong in our world (and there are many more powerful players than Trump). They forget  who is actually responsible for what’s wrong in our world. We the People are responsible.

My friends can believe it or not, but Trump is a freedom fighter, the first sovereign President in your lifetime who has pledged his life and honor to defend this country against its many enemies, both foreign and domestic. Other Administrations have come and gone, but they’ve all been cohorts amongst those globalists bent on destroying this country. 

Now, many of my “liberal/progressive” friends are now domestic enemies blindly and foolishly allied with these forces towards destroying this country ~ the last free country on this earth.

My friends, take a good look at where you stand!

The violence ravaging the streets of America is no longer a protest about race. This is a declaration of war by forces bent on destroying the USA, a country which has blessed you with the right to freedom and liberty your entire life. 

Take notice of who is allying with these forces.

These riots are an organized attack against the people of the USA and my “liberal/progressive” friends are on the wrong side of this battle contributing en masse to America’s destruction. 

Would you prefer living in Nazi Germany or Communist China? Do you wish for your children to live in The Matrix wired to a machine like a robot without a soul?Take a good look at where you stand.

For without freedom and sovereignty in the USA there will be hell to pay for many generations beyond your life. Take a hard look at where you stand.

I stand for freedom and liberty.
I stand for sovereignty for all the people.
I stand for sovereignty for the USA and every nation of the world.

Where do you stand?

~ Johnny Liberty, Author of the Global Sovereign’s Handbook (who dedicated thirty years of his life fighting for your freedom and sovereignty)

Source: Liberty International

Three Ways Lockdowns Paved the Way for These Riots | MISES

160209115236-24-mong-kok-riot-0209-exlarge-169By Ryan McMaken

There were many reasons to oppose the COVID-19 lockdowns.

They cost human lives in terms of deferred medical treatmentThey cost human lives in terms of greater suicide and drug overdoses. Domestic abuse and child abuse have increased. There is also good reason to believe that lockdowns don’t actually work. The lockdown activists capitalized on media-stoked fear to push their authoritarian agenda based not on science, but on the whims of a handful of experts who insisted that they need not present any actual evidence that their bizarre, draconian, and extreme scheme was worth the danger posed to human rights, health, and the economic well-being of billions of human beings.

Those who lacked the obsessive and irresponsible tunnel vision of the prolockdown people warned that there were other dangers as well, in terms of social and political conflict.

[RELATED: “COVID Panic: The New War on Human Rights” by Ryan McMaken.]

It didn’t require an especially clear crystal ball to see that destroying the livelihoods of countless millions while empowering a police state to harass and arrest law-abiding citizens would create a situation that maybe—just maybe—could lead to greater social and political conflict.

Specifically, there are three ways in which the lockdowns laid the groundwork for our current state of unrest.

The Lockdowns Created an Economic Disaster

The COVID-19 stay-at-home orders, business closures, and other forms of coerced social distancing have so far led to job losses for well over 30 million Americans. The unemployment rate has risen to levels not seen since the Great Depression. Food banks are under strain as Americans line up for free food. Thanks to government moratoria on evictions in many areas, it is still unknown to what extent homeowners and renters are unable to pay mortgages and rents, but a wave of delinquencies is almost certainly coming.

To advocates of lockdowns, this is all “worth it” even though these sorts of economic stresses often lead to suicide, stress-induced disease, and death. But impoverishment, unemployment, and financial ruin are all merely “inconvenient,” as described by head lockdown advocate Anthony Fauci.

To someone who isn’t enamored of lockdowns, however, it is clear that millions of job losses are likely to worsen a variety of social ills, sometimes even resulting in violence. Moreover, the current job losses appear to be affecting the young and those who earn lower incomes most.

Lockdown advocates have attempted to avoid responsibility for all this by claiming that it is the pandemic itself that has caused the current economic disaster, and not the lockdowns. This is a baseless assertion. As has been shown, neither the pandemics of 1918 or 1958 led to the sorts of job losses and decline in economic growth that we’re now seeing.

The Lockdowns Destroyed Social Institutions

Another outcome of the lockdowns has been the destruction of American social institutions. These institutions include schools (both public and private), churches, coffee shops, bars, libraries, barbershops, and many others.

Lockdown advocates continue to claim that this is no big deal and insist that people just sit at home and “binge watch” television shows. But researchers have long pointed to the importance of these institutions in preserving peace and as a means of defusing social tensions and problems.

As much as lockdown advocates may wish that human beings could be reduced to creatures that do nothing more than work all day and watch television all night, the fact is that no society can long endure such conditions.

Human beings need what are known as “third places.” In a 2016 report, the Brookings Institution described what these places are:

the most effective ones for building real community seem to be physical places where people can easily and routinely connect with each other: churches, parks, recreation centers, hairdressers, gyms and even fast-food restaurants. A recent newspaper article on McDonald’s found that for lower-income Americans, the twin arches are becoming almost the equivalent of the English “pub,” which after all is short for “public house”: groups of retirees meeting for coffee and talk, they might hold regular Bible study meetings there, and people treat the restaurant as an inexpensive hangout.

Third places have a number of important community-building attributes. Depending on their location, social classes and backgrounds can be “leveled-out” in ways that are unfortunately rare these days, with people feeling they are treated as social equals. Informal conversation is the main activity and most important linking function. One commentator refers to third places as the “living room” of society.

The lockdown advocates, in a matter of a few days, cut people off from their third places and insisted, in many cases, that this would be the “new normal” for a year or more.

Yet, these third places cannot simply be shut down—and the public told to just forget about them indefinitely—without creating the potential for violence and other antisocial behavior.

Indeed, third places act as institutions that provide a type of social control that is key to a well-functioning society. In his trenchant book The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy, historian and social critic Christopher Lasch described the importance of third places in communicating political and social values and conventions to young people, and in setting the bounds of acceptable behavior within the community. Lasch notes that these institutions are also important in defusing violent impulses among the young. Also of great importance is the fact that third places provide a means of social control that is voluntary and not a form of state coercion.

Writing in the 1990s, Lasch was lamenting the decline of third places, although he emphasized their importance even in their modern reduced form. Thanks to the lockdowns, however, these places have been crippled far beyond what Lasch might ever have imagined.

The Lockdowns Empowered the Police State

The lockdowns have created a situation in which millions of law-abiding citizens have been deemed criminals merely for seeking to make a living, leave their homes, or engage in peaceful trade.

In many areas, violations of the lockdown orders have been—or even still are, in many places—treated as criminal acts by police. This has greatly increased negative interactions between police and citizens who by no moral definition are criminals of any sort.

Many have already seen the stories: police arresting mothers for using playground equipment, police arresting business owners for using their own property, police beating people for the “crime” of standing on a sidewalk.

Complicating the issue is the apparent fact that police have not enforced social distancing edicts “uniformly.” Some have alleged, for example, that the NYPD has lopsidedly targeted nonwhites in enforcement:

Of the 40 people arrested [for social distancing violations in Brooklyn between March 17 and May 4, 35 were African American, 4 were Hispanic and 1 was white. The arrests were made in neighborhoods—Brownsville, Bedford-Stuyvesant, Cypress Hills and East New York—which have large concentrations of blacks and Latinos.

This may or may not reflect the reality of the general situation, but the fact is that the lockdowns created theperception among many that this is just yet another case of law enforcement targeting certain populations over small-time violations.

Moreover, it is quite plausible that lower-income populations have more often been on the receiving end of state harassment in the name of social distancing. After all, compliance with lockdowns is something of a luxury reserved for higher-income, white-collar residents who can work from home and remain comfortable for long periods in their roomy houses. Working-class people and those with fewer resources are far more likely to need to find income and venture outside during lockdowns. This attracts the attention of police.

Lockdown advocates, apparently in their usual state of extreme naïvete, perhaps believed that further empowering police to violently enforce government decrees against petty infractions would not lead to any unfortunate side effects down the road. Yet criminalizing millions of Americans and subjecting them to heightened police harassment is not a recipe for social tranquility.

Worsening a Volatile Situation

Of course, my comments here should not be interpreted as making excuses for rioters. Smashing up the property of innocent small business owners—or worse, physically harming innocent people—is reprehensible in all circumstances. But this isn’t about making excuses. We’re talking about avoiding extreme and immoral government policies (i.e., police-enforced lockdowns) that remove those institutions and conditions which are important in helping minimize conflict.

Some may insist that the riots would have occurred no matter what, but it’s easy to see how the lockdowns made a bad situation worse. Yes, some of the rioters are lifelong thugs who are always on the lookout for new opportunities to steal and maim. But experience suggests that the pool of people willing to engage in riots is often larger during periods of mass unemployment than during other periods. In addition, those people who exist on the margins of criminality—the sorts of people for whom third places serve an important role in moderating their more antisocial tendencies—are more likely to be swept up in these events when third places are abolished. And, as we have seen, lockdowns also create more opportunities for police abuse that ignite riots of the sort we’ve seen in recent days.

It’s true the responsibility for the riots lies primarily with the rioters. But we cannot deny that policymakers fuel the flames of conflict when they outlaw jobs and destroy people’s social support systems by cutting them off from their communities. It’s also wise to not provoke people by pushing for widespread human rights violations and additional police harassment. But this is what lockdown advocates have done, and their imprudence should not be forgotten.

Source: MISES

Over $57 Million Paid by U.S. Government for Vaccine Injuries in 2020 as Experimental Coronavirus Vaccine Fast Tracked | Vaccine Impact & Health Impact News

vaccine-injuries-deaths-3.6.20By Brian Shilhavy

With the nation currently gripped by the Coronavirus crisis, and with most of the public lauding the fact that the FDA is fast-tracking a new vaccine to supposedly fight the Coronavirus, with testing beginning already on humans with the experimental vaccine while bypassing animal testing, unknown to most of the public, a meeting was held on March 6, 2020 with the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV), under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

These are quarterly meetings held every 3 months, as required by law, but seldom, if ever, publicized or reported on by the corporate “mainstream” media.

Health Impact News might be the only place where these quarterly meetings are reported, and you can review past reports here. We have been accused of publishing “Fake News” when we publish these reports, but all of the information is available to the public and posted on the Federal Government’s websites.

The Big Tech companies that control so much of the Internet’s traffic, work hard to suppress this information. If you visit one of Health Impact News‘ Facebook Pages, for example, you are likely to see this notice inserted to the top of our page:

The March 6th meeting by the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines included a report from the Department of Justice (DOJ) on cases settled for vaccine injuries and deaths as mandated by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).

The NVICP was started as a result of a law passed in 1986 that gave pharmaceutical companies legal immunity from being sued due to injuries and deaths resulting from vaccines.

If you or a family member is injured or dies from vaccines, you must sue the federal government in this special vaccine court. Many cases are litigated for years before a settlement is reached.

DICP-Report-3.6.20

The March, 2020 DOJ report states that 288 petitions were filed during the 3-month time period between 11/16/19 – 2/15/20, with 181 cases being adjudicated and 146 cases compensated.

The March, 2020 DOJ report lists 74 of these settlements for vaccine injuries and deaths, and 60 of those were for damages caused by the flu vaccine. Read more…

Source: Vaccine Impact & Health Impact News

US Lawmaker Introduces Bill to Open Potential Lawsuits Against Chinese Regime Over Pandemic | The Epoch Times

CHINA-HEALTH-VIRUSBy Cathy He

A Republican congressman introduced a bill on April 3 that would make it easier for Americans to bring legal action against the Chinese regime for its role in causing the global pandemic.

The Chinese regime currently enjoys protection from lawsuits filed in U.S. courts under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, a legal rule that insulates countries from being sued in other countries’ courts. There are, however, exceptions to this rule found in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).

Stop COVID Act, introduced by Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas), would amend FSIA to provide another exception to immunity, for any state that is found to have “intentionally or unintentionally, to have discharged a biological weapon … in the United States or such discharge results in the bodily injury of [a] United States citizen.”

The move comes amid growing calls by U.S. lawmakers to hold the Chinese regime accountable for its initial coverup of the CCP virus outbreak in Wuhan, which has since morphed into a global pandemic claiming tens of thousands of lives and devastating the world economy.

The Stop COVID Act will give our legal system the power to investigate the origin of the virus and, if found guilty hold accountable those responsible for creating and releasing it,”  Gooden said in a press release.

The legislation would pave the way for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the source of the virus, and file claims against the Chinese regime in the United States, the statement said.

The origin of the virus is still unknown. While Chinese authorities initially suggested that a live animal market in Wuhan was the source of the outbreak, officials have since steered away from this narrative. The first documented patient, a bedridden man in his 70s in Wuhan who showed symptoms on Dec. 1, did not have any contact with the market.

Meanwhile, Beijing has launched a global disinformation campaign to push the unfounded theory that the virus originated from outside China, in a bid to deflect blame over its mismanagement of the outbreak. One Chinese official has claimed, without providing evidence, that the virus was introduced to Wuhan by U.S. Army personnel.

US Lawsuits

Despite the potential barrier of sovereign immunity, several lawsuits were recently launched in domestic courts against the Chinese regime, seeking to hold it liable for the damage the CCP virus has caused to Americans.

One of them is a class action filed by Florida law firm The Berman Law Group in March. The firm, in a joint statement issued on April 3 with Lucas Compton, a Washington-based lobbying firm hired to do PR for the lawsuit, welcomed Gooden’s bill, saying it would “provide additional firepower to our legal position.”

But the firm maintained that the “lawsuit is not only enforceable in its current state, but addresses key legal components that are exceptions to the Foreign Sovereignty Immunities Act’s (FSIA) jurisdiction.”

The complaint says the action falls under two exceptions to FSIA: the “commercial activity” exception—that is, acts in connection with a commercial activity conducted outside the United States that cause a direct effect on the United States—and the exemption for death or harm caused by negligence or other tortious acts or omissions by a foreign state.

But Yale law professor Stephen L. Carter argued in a recent Bloomberg opinion piece that these exceptions are unlikely to be made out.

“The Florida class action suit asserts that the exception for commercial activities applies, but it’s not easy to see how,” Carter wrote.

With regards to the second exemption, “that section specifically bars any claim ‘based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function regardless of whether the discretion be abused.’ It’s hard to find a way around this restriction,” Carter wrote.

Matthew Moore, Berman Law’s class action attorney, told The Epoch Times that the restriction Carter mentions does not apply here because the regime acted “completely egregiously against humanity.”

“If they’ve hidden something of danger, then they don’t get to say that that was a discretionary act,” Moore said.

Though the first cluster of infections appeared in early to mid-December, Chinese authorities did not confirm the outbreak until Dec. 31, 2019. It was not until Jan. 20 that it confirmed human-to-human transmission of the virus. Prior to that, officials had described the outbreak as “preventable and controllable,” and said the risk of human-to-human transmission was low. Yet a January study of the first 425 cases of the disease in Wuhan found “there is evidence that human-to-human transmission has occurred among close contacts since the middle of December 2019.”

At the same time, authorities also silenced Wuhan doctors who sought to warn their peers about the outbreak in late December. They were reprimanded by local police for “spreading rumors.”

Berman Law also plans on adding another FSIA exception to their lawsuit—the exemption for “terrorism,” Jeremy Alters, the chief strategist and non-attorney spokesperson of the firm’s lawsuit, told The Epoch Times.

“We have a virus that is well known to the Chinese government. They’re aware of its propensity to spread human-to-human rapidly. They’re aware of its propensity to harm people and to kill. They’re aware that it originated in the city,” Alters said. “They hid the information from us.”

He added that by the time the Chinese regime alerted the United States and other countries about the severity of the outbreak and initiated lockdown measures, it was already too late—5 million people had already left Wuhan, spreading the virus to other parts of China and overseas.

“How is that not … an act of intentional terror?” Alters said. “This is an act of bioterrorism.”

Source: The Epoch Times

China Starts Mass Quarantines Again After Failing to Stop COVID-19: real death toll from the coronavirus in Wuhan, China may be over 40,000, more than 16 times the amount of deaths currently reported by China | Trending Politics

5e87b504daa4b7133According to a new breaking news report from Politico, China is once again implementing mass quarantines to combat the coronavirus outbreak after their initial quarantine failed.

“Henan province in central China has taken the drastic measure of putting a mid-sized county in total lockdown as authorities try to fend off a second coronavirus wave in the midst of a push to revive the economy,” Politico reported. “Curfew-like measures came into effect on Tuesday in Jia county, near the city of Pingdingshan, with the area’s roughly 600,000 residents told to stay home, according to a notice on the country’s official microblog account.”

This breaking news comes at the same time as a new report from Washington Post Beijing bureau chief Anna Fifield stated that the real death toll from the coronavirus in Wuhan, China may be over 40,000, more than 16 times the amount of deaths currently reported by China.

Check out what the The Washington Post reported:

The coronavirus pandemic ravaging the globe officially claimed 2,563 lives in Wuhan, where it began in a market that sold exotic animals for consumption. But evidence emerging from the city as it stirs from its two-month hibernation suggests the real death toll is exponentially higher. …

Using photos posted online, social media sleuths have estimated that Wuhan funeral homes had returned 3,500 urns a day since March 23. That would imply a death toll in Wuhan of about 42,000 — or 16 times the official number. Another widely shared calculation, based on Wuhan’s 84 furnaces running nonstop and each cremation taking an hour, put the death toll at 46,800.

This bombshell report comes not much after Bloomberg News reported that U.S. intelligence officials shared a classified report with President Donald Trump stating that China had lied about how bad the coronavirus was in their country.

“China’s public reporting on cases and deaths is intentionally incomplete,” Bloomberg News reported. “Two of the officials said the report concludes that China’s numbers are fake.”

Vice President Mike Pence also spoke out on the matter: “The reality is that we could have been better off if China had been more forthcoming. What appears evident now is that long before the world learned in December that China was dealing with this, and maybe as much as a month earlier than that, that the outbreak was real in China.”

Dr Deborah Birx, the head of the White House Coronavirus Response also spoke out, indicating that China may have lied about their coronavirus numbers.

“When you talk about could we have known something different, you know, I think all of us, I was overseas when this happened in Africa and I think when you look at the China data originally, and you said, there’s 80 million people, or 20 million people in Wuhan and 80 million people in Hubei, and they come up with the number of 50,000, you start thinking of this more like SARS than you do this kind of global pandemic,” Birx said.

Based on the information that China provided, Birx stated that she did not think that the coronavirus would escalate into a global pandemic.

“So, I think the medical community interpreted the Chinese data as this was serious, but smaller than anyone expected because I think probably we were missing a significant amount of the data” from China, Birx said.

Source: Trending Politics, Politico, Bloomberg & Washington Post