Le complotisme présente cinq caractéristiques majeures qui le distinguent de l’anti-complotisme et qui résument tout son génie. Ses caractéristiques, que nous passerons rapidement en revue, sont autant d’avantages sur l’anti-complotisme qui nous feront comprendre, par contraste, les limites épistémologiques de ce dernier, ses motivations profondes et ses soubassements idéologiques.
Notre conclusion sera double :
Seul le complotisme permet d’appréhender la nature du pouvoir. L’anti-complotisme est une émanation du pouvoir dont la vocation est de le protéger et de lui permettre d’échapper à la compréhension de ceux sur lesquels ce pouvoir s’exerce.
On ne dialogue pas avec le pouvoir : on s’y soumet ou on le combat. Il s’ensuit, naturellement, que les complotistes n’ont plus à chercher les faveurs des anti-complotistes ou de leurs maîtres, ni à s’excuser de penser hors des sentiers battus ou d’émettre des hypothèses de travail audacieuses. Il est temps pour les complotistes de se montrer offensifs et face à l’idéologie du chaos que le pouvoir incarne et projette sur le monde à travers ses relais médiatiques et institutionnels, de présenter le complotisme comme un remède aux pulsions mortifères de l’hydre mondialiste. Le complotisme est un humanisme.
Les 5 avantages du complotisme
Avantage Méthodologique
Tandis que l’anti-complotiste se contente la plupart du temps d’énoncer la thèse (officielle s’entend), le complotiste est contraint de travailler, d’approfondir à la fois la thèse et l’antithèse. Ainsi, le complotiste a une connaissance fine de la version officielle et des arguments de la version opposée. Cela le contraint à chercher et à ausculter plus profondément les faits, à les présenter dans un ordre cohérent et à les soumettre à un examen critique poussé.
Tandis que l’anti-complotiste n’a qu’à répéter la thèse officielle sans avoir besoin de la justifier, le complotiste est obligé de chercher des preuves solides à l’appui de ses propos et finit par acquérir une connaissance bien plus large que celle de l’anti-complotiste qui a borné son champ d’investigation parce qu’il lui suffit de citer une source « prestigieuse » pour gagner la bataille du pouvoir médiatique et la considération de ses pairs.
Que ce soit, par exemple, pour le 11 Septembre ou le réchauffement climatique anthropique, seuls les complotistes appliquent le principe du contradictoire, principe fondamental à la fois pour les journalistes, les historiens et les juges qui devraient examiner méthodiquement et en profondeur les thèses en présence avant de se prononcer sur le fond de l’affaire dont ils s’occupent. L’anti-complotiste ne voit pas l’absurdité de sa position qui consiste à penser que la version officielle est toujours la bonne (comme la raison du plus fort). Ce qui revient à interdire toute alternative, toute contradiction, toute possibilité de remettre en cause la version des faits une fois qu’elle a été estampillée par le sceau officiel et crachée sur les ondes des médias dominants.
L’anti-complotiste confine ainsi le réel dans une forme figée pour les siècles des siècles. Il se comporte comme le gardien d’une prison où les faits récalcitrants sont tenus en joug et passés à tabac, loin du regard des foules, tant que leur volonté d’indépendance et de franchise n’a pas été brisée. Il rééduque et torture les faits qui ne suivent pas ses mots d’ordre ou son catéchisme et ne les relâche dans l’arène publique qu’une fois qu’ils ont perdu leur prétention à dire leur part de vérité. Le complotiste libère les faits cadenassés qui retrouvent tout leur sens caché et leur autonomie, il les rend à l’air libre où se meuvent à leur aise la vérité et le réel.
Le complotiste n’ayant pas droit aux arguments d’autorité (par exemple, l’invocation d’un prétendu « consensus scientifique » des experts sur le réchauffement climatique anthropique) et étant soumis au feu permanent des critiques, il lui faut devenir un orfèvre dans son domaine pour pouvoir contrer un adversaire qui se contente de répéter un message univoque et balaie d’un revers de mains dédaigneux les arguments qu’on lui adresse.
Enfin, le complotiste cherche à donner du sens à ce qui, apparemment, n’en a pas toujours. Il ne se contente pas de laisser l’inexplicable inexpliqué. Si trois immeubles s’effondrent sur eux-mêmes alors que seulement deux ont été percutés par des avions, le complotiste essaie de comprendre ce phénomène étrange en convoquant des causes humaines et physiques qui sont dans l’ordre naturel des choses. Là où l’anti-complotiste, à court d’idée et d’arguments, finira pas se contenter de hausser les épaules, le complotiste, ira chercher des causes humaines (des volontés) si les causes physiques (mécanique des corps et mécanique des fluides) ne sont pas suffisantes.
De son côté, l’anti-complotiste, n’hésitera pas à réinventer les lois de la physique, juste pour l’occasion, afin de s’interdire de penser au-delà de la thèse officielle. Car, s’il devait s’aventurer sur le terrain glissant d’une hypothèse alternative, cela pourrait le conduire à devoir désigner un coupable inattendu, à découvrir un acte humain, voire une entente entre plusieurs personnes conscientes de leurs actes. Ainsi, pour expliquer l’absence de débris d’avion sur le Pentagone ou sur le site de Pennsylvanie en septembre 2001, l’anti-complotiste invoquera la possibilité que les avions se soient gazéifiés (thèse défendue par le très « prestigieux » journal Le Monde), ajoutant de la sorte quelques règles nouvelles aux lois de la thermodynamique. Il ne lui viendrait jamais à l’esprit qu’un mensonge volontaire se cache peut-être derrière l’inexplicable. Dans le même ordre d’idée il en vient à voir, dans les guerres menées par les démocraties occidentales, des événements naturels que ne guident aucune pensée maléfique ni volonté humaine.
Pour résumer les avantages méthodologiques de son approche, on peut dire que le complotiste travaille plus que l’anti-complotiste, connaît mieux son sujet et les arguments des parties en présence, ne se repose pas sur des arguments d’autorité pour avancer ses idées et accumule les éléments de preuve pour justifier ses propos et donner du sens aux événements et aux faits qui se déroulent devant lui.
Ce sont là des raisons qui expliquent que les anti-complotistes ne répondent presque jamais positivement aux offres de dialogue que leur font les complotistes : ils savent, en effet, qu’ils finiront généralement déboîtés par les arguments de leurs contradicteurs. Pour justifier un tel refus, ils rangent volontiers leurs adversaires sous l’appellation générique et bien commode du « camp de la haine », mettant ainsi entre eux et les complotistes une sorte de cordon sanitaire émotionnel qu’il serait difficile et dangereux pour tout un chacun de rompre impunément. Cette technique de la rhétorique de disqualification utilisée à l’encontre du complotiste, à laquelle vient généralement s’ajouter des menaces et des injures, est le signe que, sur le terrain de la méthode, le complotiste vient bousculer son adversaire dans ses derniers retranchements, lorsque celui-ci est au bord de son propre gouffre intellectuel.
Avantage Psychologique
Le complotiste n’a ni d’à priori ni de tabou. L’impensable est pour lui toujours pensable. Si le complotiste navigue ainsi volontiers, par méthode et par prudence, dans l’air du soupçon et ne prête sa confiance à quiconque, il traite tout le monde à la même enseigne, les puissants comme les faibles ; il les écoute avec le même degré d’attention, sans chercher à plaire ou à déplaire à leurs susceptibilités respectives. Il veut comprendre et non pas justifier.
De son côté, l’anti-complotiste est enfermé dans le dogme de l’infaillibilité démocratique, ce qui lui interdit automatiquement tout un champ des possibles. Il est psychologiquement incapable d’imaginer que nos dirigeants démocrates puissent faire le mal intentionnellement. C’est bien cet à priori qui, aux yeux des complotistes, rend les anti-complotistes aveugles à la compréhension d’une part importante de notre monde. Et pour le dire plus clairement, les anti-complotistes sont dans l’incapacité de comprendre la nature et les ressorts du pouvoir (nous y reviendrons). Ils ne voient pas que le pouvoir, ontologiquement, est une physique de la contrainte et une métaphysique de la domination.
L’anti-complotiste est tellement engoncé dans cette opinion, qui est pour lui une sorte d’article de foi, qu’il ne pourra jamais concevoir que nos dirigeants puissent, par exemple, en toute connaissance de cause : (i) empêcher l’utilisation d’un remède peu coûteux et efficace contre un virus, cousin de celui de la grippe, afin de favoriser une solution imaginaire et hypothétique (le vaccin) lors d’une pandémie annoncée et voulue, pandémie qui n’est pas tant le résultat d’une incompétence généralisée de nos commis en charge des affaires de l’État, que d’un chaos organisé par ces derniers comme un jeu de rôle mondialiste planétaire ; (ii) s’allier avec des mouvances terroristes islamistes pour faire tomber des régimes laïques en Libye et en Syrie en ayant recours à des actes de terrorisme à grande échelle et en organisant le massacre et le gazage de populations entières tout en accusant le camp adverse d’en être responsable. De telles conclusions, iraient au-delà de ses forces psychologiques et l’amèneraient, sans doute, au bord de la crise de nerf et de l’hystérie.
Ainsi, pour l’anti-complotiste, la démocratie occidentale ne peut commettre de crime puisqu’elle ne peut avoir de mauvaises intentions : elle ne tue que par dommages collatéraux, jamais volontairement. Par conséquent, on ne peut lui imputer des crimes de masse, seulement des erreurs circonstancielles et contextuelles qui ont eu de tragiques conséquences humaines inattendues. La culpabilité de la démocratie occidentale ne dépasse jamais celle de l’élève qui aurait pu mieux faire.
Les anti-complotistes ne voient et n’admettent de complots que chez les terroristes musulmans ou les Russes, les Iraniens ou les Chinois, quand cela arrange leurs affaires et conforte leurs représentations du monde binaire (« eux » contre « nous »). Là, en général, aucune preuve tangible n’est exigée, il suffit à l’accusation de désigner les coupables pour emporter la conviction de la foule conformiste des bourgeois cultivés qui ne craignent rien tant que d’émettre des hypothèses et, encore plus, d’avancer des théories qui sortiraient de la vulgate publiée régulièrement dans les gazettes officielles (Le Monde, The Guardian ou le New York Times).
Avantage Conceptuel
Le complotiste offre des outils intellectuels pour appréhender le monde. Il propose des termes (qu’il a ou non construits lui-même) pour désigner des événements, des phénomènes difficiles à cerner ou à concevoir : Mondialisme, Atlantisme, Empire, Opposition Contrôlée, État Profond, Satanisme, Nouvel Ordre Mondial, Injonctions Paradoxales, Dogme de l’Infaillibilité Démocratique, Crimes Médiatiques, Rhétorique de Disqualification, sont autant de concepts outils permettant de sortir de l’hébétude dans laquelle le complexe médiatico-industriel progressiste nous maintient, afin de mieux cerner et comprendre le monde dans lequel nous évoluons.
Le complotiste apprécie la clarté d’un concept là où l’anti-complotiste préfère la confusion, l’absence de sens et de signification, ou le sens inversé de l’absurde : non pas le mystère qui pourrait nous ouvrir la porte d’une transcendance porteuse d’espoir, mais le vide comme explication universelle. L’anti-complotiste ne nous laisse qu’un champ de bataille sémantique chaotique où le néant et l’ambiguïté sont maîtres du réel et de nos neurones.
Empêcher la compréhension du réel et l’émergence des concepts explicatifs est sans doute l’un des objectifs du pouvoir pour demeurer « le pouvoir » et persévérer dans son être. Son credo est de rester insaisissable, « impensable » et impensé, pour n’être point combattu. Un totalitarisme dont on ignorerait l’oppression ne susciterait sans doute pas d’opposition autre que contrôlée. C’est tout le génie de la démocratie représentative, instrument privilégié de l’oligarchie occidentale, que de nous empêcher d’établir clairement des liens de causalité entre des décisions humaines de quelques-uns et la longue chaîne des malheurs des peuples.
Avantage Moral
Le complotiste a un avantage moral immense par rapport à l’anti-complotiste parce qu’il doit montrer plus de courage et affronter les difficiles conséquences sociales de ses propos. Tandis que l’anti-complotiste, en bon conformiste adorateur de la normalité sociale, ne fait que relayer et répéter les paroles de l’évangile médiatico-politique qui lui est servi quotidiennement, le complotiste sait qu’il aura contre lui les puissants et la masse des bourgeois cultivés qui peuplent les cercles mondains des multiples socialités auxquelles la vie nous invite tous à participer.
Le complotiste prend constamment des risques dans sa vie professionnelle et privée pour simplement émettre des doutes et proposer des explications alternatives : on ne compte plus le nombre de complotistes débarqués de leur poste pour avoir avancé quelques hypothèses dérangeantes sur le 11 Septembre, l’implication des démocraties occidentales dans le terrorisme islamique ou la responsabilité du CO2 dans le réchauffement climatique anthropique. Si le courage ne donne pas raison, il a une valeur intrinsèque qui distingue nettement le complotiste du bourgeois cultivé conformiste qui fait office d’adversaire.
Le complotiste ose nommer le mal, il ose désigner les puissants et les puissances qui sont derrière ces manifestations humaines : il ne se contente pas, comme les professionnels de la révolte, d’attaquer des abstractions (par exemple, le capitalisme), il confronte des pouvoirs concrets (dont la somme des liens et des alliances fait et révèle le pouvoir dans toute sa puissance et ses nuisances) et nomme les responsables. Pour le 11 Septembre, il désignera volontiers le petit groupe de néoconservateurs comme responsables ou au moins complices des attentats ; il en fera le portrait détaillé en égrenant leur CV et leurs méfaits avérés. Concernant l’hystérie sanitaire mondialiste déclenchée au printemps 2020, il n’hésitera pas à pointer du doigt le rôle de Bill Gates et des dirigeants de l’OMS, de certaines firmes pharmaceutiques (comme Gilead) ou de certains médias (comme BFMTV en France) dans le déclenchement de cette expérience orwellienne à l’échelle mondiale.
L’anti-complotiste, lorsqu’il dénonce, est plutôt dans la délation puisqu’il désigne à la vindicte médiatique et judiciaire, à la censure et aux poursuites pénales, les lanceurs d’alertes qui n’ont en général que leur plume pour se défendre. L’anti-complotiste utilise volontiers la menace et l’intimidation pour faire taire ceux qui s’aventurent hors des sentiers battus et rebattus : la rhétorique de disqualification et l’hystérie émotionnelle sont ses outils préférés.
Ainsi, tandis que le complotiste dénonce les puissants et se met volontairement dans leur ligne de mire, l’anti-complotiste établi des listes d’opposants isolés à exécuter en place publique sans leur donner la parole. Il y a du Cyrano de Bergerac chez le complotiste : s’il n’a, bien évidemment, pas toujours raison, il avance empanaché d’indépendance et de franchise et revendique le droit de se tromper.
Les complotistes sont à la fois une dissidence et une résistance. Peut-être même les seuls à s’opposer aux expériences orwelliennes que nos démocraties oligarchiques nous imposent de temps à autres pour éprouver leur puissance : hystérie sanitaire, hystérie réchauffiste, hystérie anti-Trump (qui n’est que le syndrome d’une hystérie contre les souverainistes et les partisans de la diversité des nations), etc. Comme nous le verrons en partie 2, l’anti-complotisme est une hystérie.
Avantage Prédictif
Ce qui frappe, quand on fait le bilan du complotisme sur les deux dernières décennies, c’est l’incroyable capacité de celui-ci à avoir raison, à prédire ce qui va advenir. En analysant avec sérieux et pertinence le présent et le passé récent, le complotisme est capable de mieux appréhender les grandes orientations qui se dessinent devant nous que tous les experts réunis en conclaves officiels.
Sur le 11 septembre, sur la guerre en Irak et en Syrie, sur le réchauffement climatique anthropique, sur le Russiagate et l’affaire ukrainienne aux États-Unis, sur le Covid-19 et sur tant d’autres sujets scientifiques ou géopolitiques, le complotisme engrange les victoires les unes après les autres.
La démonstration de la force prédictive de la pensée complotiste a été particulièrement spectaculaire lors de l’épisode de totalitarisme sanitaire et sécuritaire que nous avons tous vécus au printemps 2020. Aux modèles prédictifs délirants (souvent informatiques) invoqués par les comités « scientifiques » mis en place un peu partout en Occident lors de cette drôle de crise sanitaire qui prévoyaient l’apocalypse tous les matins du monde, les complotistes ont opposé le bon sens, l’analyse cartésienne, le raisonnement et le sang-froid, et ont ainsi pu identifier rapidement des solutions efficaces pourtant décriées par tous les médias dominants tombés volontairement dans une hystérie destinée à faire perdre l’entendement collectif. Le complotiste est parvenu à s’extraire du bruit et de la fureur de l’actualité brouillonne et a eu raison sur toute la ligne : de l’analyse du problème à la proposition d’un remède. N’ayant d’à priori à l’égard de personne, le complotiste a écouté toutes les parties en présence et à pu saisir au vol le réel avant qu’il ne soit confisqué et défiguré par les tortionnaires de l’information qui lui ont substitué la peur comme seul vecteur de la représentation du monde. Nous y reviendrons en détail dans la deuxième partie ou dans un article séparé.
Depuis le début du conflit en Syrie, seuls les complotistes savaient que le Président Bachar el-Assad était soutenu par la grande majorité de son peuple et n’était pas au bord de la déroute, bien que tous les journaux ayant pignon sur rue en Occident annonçaient à longueur de colonnes la fin imminente du « régime sanguinaire ». Concernant le Russiagate et l’implication du clan Obama dans l’espionnage dont la campagne de Trump a fait l’objet en 2016 et 2017, seuls les complotistes ont compris qu’il s’agissait bien d’une tentative de déstabilisation d’un candidat (puis d’un Président) pas assez mondialiste, de la part de l’État profond américain et qu’aucun élément probant ne permettait d’affirmer qu’il était, de près ou de loin, un agent russe (tous les documents récemment déclassifiés confirment cette analyse). Concernant le réchauffement climatique, nous détaillerons dans un papier à venir, les nombreuses victoires épistémologiques emportées de haute lutte contre (i) les prédictions arrogantes et foireuses de « l’unanimité » des scientifiques de la planète et (ii) l’intime conviction d’une opinion publique mondiale chauffée à blanc à l’encontre d’une menace qui n’existe que dans les modèles informatiques délirants des marchands de peur !
Le complotisme est la grande aventure humaine, intellectuelle et politique de notre siècle. Si nous voulons que l’homme perdure dans ses fondamentaux humains, loin des promesses trans-humaniste et technicistes qu’on veut nous imposer sans débat, il est temps d’affirmer ce que nous sommes : un humanisme.
Le propre du prestige est d’empêcher de voir les choses telles qu’elles sont et de paralyser tous nos jugements. Les foules toujours, les individus le plus souvent, ont besoin, sur tous les sujets, d’opinions toutes faites. Le succès de ces opinions est indépendant de la part de vérité ou d’erreur qu’elles contiennent; il dépend uniquement de leur prestige.
Here come the lockdowns and mask mandates again… covid tyranny, round two
The promise that vaccines would give you freedom was just a calculated lie. Now, even those who are vaccinated are being subjected to new lockdowns and mask mandates, all over the world. Because the real goal of all this is to crush humanity, keep people in a state of pandemic fear, and justify endless injections with spike protein bioweapons. See the stories and videos below for more details. And use this time to double down on your own prepping plans. What we’ve all experienced so far is just the beginning of the nightmare yet to come from tyrannical governments. Also watch for my new Situation Update podcast on Monday, plus a new interview with Steve Quayle that should be posted Monday afternoon at the HRR channel on Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport
Here come the lockdowns and mask mandates again… covid tyranny, round two
The promise that vaccines would give you freedom was just a calculated lie. Now, even those who are vaccinated are being subjected to new lockdowns and mask mandates, all over the world. Because the real goal of all this is to crush humanity, keep people in a state of pandemic fear, and justify endless injections with spike protein bioweapons. See the stories and videos below for more details. And use this time to double down on your own prepping plans. What we’ve all experienced so far is just the beginning of the nightmare yet to come from tyrannical governments. Also watch for my new Situation Update podcast on Monday, plus a new interview with Steve Quayle that should be posted Monday afternoon at the HRR channel on Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport
Organic Hemp Protein Powder A complete protein source, organic hemp protein powder provides all 9 essential amino acids. Boost your daily protein intake with Health Ranger Select Organic Hemp Protein Powder. Made from pure hemp seeds, our premium hemp protein powder contains no gluten or GMOs and is vegan, non-China and certified Kosher and organic. It is also meticulously lab tested for glyphosate, heavy metals and microbiology. Learn More
(Natural News) The Biden administration recently admitted that it is working with Big Tech to censor and remove so-called “problematic content.” In a July 15 press conference, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed that the administration worked closely with Facebook and other social media platforms to flag problematic posts. Psaki’s remarks bolstered claims that the government and Big Tech collaborated to censor contrary opinions under the guise of “misinformation.”
During the press conference, Psaki answered a query regarding technology firms being called to exercise more aggression in policing misinformation. “We are in regular touch with these social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff. [This] is a big issue of misinformation, specifically on the pandemic,” she said.
The press secretary also cited a number of actions the federal government has done to combat misinformation about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19). According to Psaki, the federal government “increased disinformation research and tracking” within the Office of the Surgeon General and flagged “problematic posts … that spread disinformation.”
She also added that the federal government worked to connect medical experts and influences to promote “accurate information” and boost “trusted content.” Psaki said: “We’re helping get trusted content out there.”
Surgeon General Vivek Murthy also attended the July 15 press conference. When asked if misinformation was the No. 1 reason why people are not getting vaccinated, he answered that it was only one of several reasons. “What we know from polls … is that two-thirds of people who are not vaccinated either believe common myths about the COVID-19 vaccine or think some of those myths might be true,” Murthy replied.
The surgeon general called on social media companies to intensify their censorship of purported COVID-19 misinformation. “We expect more from our technology companies. We’re asking them to monitor misinformation more closely … [and] consistently take action against misinformation super-spreaders on their platforms,” Murthy said. He also called on news organizations to “proactively address the public’s questions” without allowing health misinformation to seep through.
Big Tech censorship cranked up to 11, thanks to the federal government
The July 15 press conference featuring Psaki and Murthy followed the latter’s release of a 22-page announcement warning about the dangers of health misinformation. Murthy’s advisory called health misinformation “a serious threat” that can “cause confusion [and] sow mistrust.” He said: “Limiting the spread of health misinformation is a moral and civic imperative that will require a whole-of-society effort.”
The announcement from Murthy also put forward suggestions for technology companies to fight misinformation. It called on these firms to “prioritize early detection of misinformation ‘super-spreaders’ and repeat offenders.” Clear consequences should be imposed on defiant violators of social media policy, it added.
Murthy’s document also called on technology platforms to bolster their multilingual content moderators and machine learning algorithms in other non-English languages. This was because health information in languages other than English continued to proliferate. It also noted that health misinformation on live streams, which are more difficult to moderate, ought to be addressed likewise.
Republican lawmakers did not take too kindly to what they dubbed as Psaki’s remarks during the July 15 press conference. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley described her comment as a “casual admission of collusion” between the government and Big Tech. He claimed that the Biden administration was attempting to “censor speech and evade the First Amendment.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy echoed Hawley’s sentiments, claiming that Big Tech and the White House conspired to control and censor Americans. He wrote in a tweet: “The Biden administration just announced they are working with Facebook to censor more Americans. Big Tech and Big Government want the same thing: To control you. As a reminder, America is a land of freedom.”
(Natural News) The Biden administration recently admitted that it is working with Big Tech to censor and remove so-called “problematic content.” In a July 15 press conference, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed that the administration worked closely with Facebook and other social media platforms to flag problematic posts. Psaki’s remarks bolstered claims that the government and Big Tech collaborated to censor contrary opinions under the guise of “misinformation.”
During the press conference, Psaki answered a query regarding technology firms being called to exercise more aggression in policing misinformation. “We are in regular touch with these social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff. [This] is a big issue of misinformation, specifically on the pandemic,” she said.
The press secretary also cited a number of actions the federal government has done to combat misinformation about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19). According to Psaki, the federal government “increased disinformation research and tracking” within the Office of the Surgeon General and flagged “problematic posts … that spread disinformation.”
She also added that the federal government worked to connect medical experts and influences to promote “accurate information” and boost “trusted content.” Psaki said: “We’re helping get trusted content out there.”
Surgeon General Vivek Murthy also attended the July 15 press conference. When asked if misinformation was the No. 1 reason why people are not getting vaccinated, he answered that it was only one of several reasons. “What we know from polls … is that two-thirds of people who are not vaccinated either believe common myths about the COVID-19 vaccine or think some of those myths might be true,” Murthy replied.
The surgeon general called on social media companies to intensify their censorship of purported COVID-19 misinformation. “We expect more from our technology companies. We’re asking them to monitor misinformation more closely … [and] consistently take action against misinformation super-spreaders on their platforms,” Murthy said. He also called on news organizations to “proactively address the public’s questions” without allowing health misinformation to seep through.
Big Tech censorship cranked up to 11, thanks to the federal government
The July 15 press conference featuring Psaki and Murthy followed the latter’s release of a 22-page announcement warning about the dangers of health misinformation. Murthy’s advisory called health misinformation “a serious threat” that can “cause confusion [and] sow mistrust.” He said: “Limiting the spread of health misinformation is a moral and civic imperative that will require a whole-of-society effort.”
The announcement from Murthy also put forward suggestions for technology companies to fight misinformation. It called on these firms to “prioritize early detection of misinformation ‘super-spreaders’ and repeat offenders.” Clear consequences should be imposed on defiant violators of social media policy, it added.
Murthy’s document also called on technology platforms to bolster their multilingual content moderators and machine learning algorithms in other non-English languages. This was because health information in languages other than English continued to proliferate. It also noted that health misinformation on live streams, which are more difficult to moderate, ought to be addressed likewise.
Republican lawmakers did not take too kindly to what they dubbed as Psaki’s remarks during the July 15 press conference. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley described her comment as a “casual admission of collusion” between the government and Big Tech. He claimed that the Biden administration was attempting to “censor speech and evade the First Amendment.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy echoed Hawley’s sentiments, claiming that Big Tech and the White House conspired to control and censor Americans. He wrote in a tweet: “The Biden administration just announced they are working with Facebook to censor more Americans. Big Tech and Big Government want the same thing: To control you. As a reminder, America is a land of freedom.”
The name of this website is about to change from Lockdown Sceptics to the Daily Sceptic. I intended this change to coincide with the bonfire of the coronavirus restrictions – the long-awaited terminus – but ‘Freedom Day’ has turned out to be a damp squib. Not only have many of the restrictions remained in place, but it’s been made clear by Chris Whitty and others that any freedoms we’ve been granted today will be snatched away as soon as the NHS comes under pressure again.
I always imagined I’d retire Lockdown Sceptics one day – turn it into an archive that would serve as a record of a dark period in our history – but after almost 16 months of continuous activity, it has developed in ways I hadn’t anticipated. I don’t just mean it averages 1.5 million page views a month and has almost 15,000 email subscribers, as well as a staff of seven. It has also attracted a community of regular contributors and commentators, either above the line, below the line, or in the forums, as well as a team of tireless moderators. Together, we’ve created a kind of intellectual home for tens of thousands of people, and I get regular emails from people all over the world telling me that if it wasn’t for Lockdown Sceptics they would have gone mad.
So instead of shutting down the site, I’ve decided to turn it into the Daily Sceptic. All of the original content we published will still be there, organised under the headings you can see on the right-hand vertical, and the focus will be on the lockdowns and associated restrictions for the time being. But the subject matter will be a bit broader. I wanted to create something more permanent, something that wasn’t contingent on lockdowns continuing forever, but which was imbued with the same irreverent, antic spirit as the original site, and the same rigorous, analytical approach.
So the Daily Sceptic will include sceptical articles by disaffected journalists and academics – including citizen journalists and independent scholars – about a range of public policies that are supposedly based on science or data or evidence, where ‘the Science’ is being invoked as a source of unassailable authority, but which often appear to be rooted in a covert political agenda. The idea is to challenge the new powerful class of government scientists and public health officials – as well as their colleagues in universities, grant-giving trusts, large international charities, Silicon Valley and the pharmaceutical industry – that have emerged as a kind of secular priesthood during the pandemic. And to challenge them on their own terms, much like the group of citizen journalists who successfully rehabilitated the ‘lab leak’ hypothesis after it had been designated a ‘conspiracy theory’ in the pages of the Lancet. (Scientific and medical journals will also be in our sites.)
The temptation when debunking ‘the Science’ behind these policies is to see sinister cabals at work, bent on some secret plot to subvert democratic institutions and usher in a New World Order in which they control every aspect of our lives. But as someone who’s earned his living as a journalist for over 35 years, occasionally with a front row seat on the inner workings of government, I’m a subscriber to the cock-up theory of history. I see a great deal of vanity and hubris in the state’s mismanagement of this crisis, but not much planning or conspiring. I don’t doubt that plenty of clever, successful people in the Government’s orbit have seized upon opportunities during the past 16 months, enriching themselves or consolidating their power and status in some other way, and a fair few are now doing what they can to keep the gravy train on the road. But that’s a far cry from the ‘Plandemic’. History can in rare circumstances be bent to the will of an extraordinary individual, but it is never planned. Societies ‘reset’ themselves all the time, but not in a way that’s ‘great’ if by that is meant ‘permanent’, and I doubt even Klaus Schwab really believes that. He’s just a carnival barker standing outside a tent called ‘Davos’ and we shouldn’t take his flimflam too seriously.
I know some readers will disagree and I look forward to seeing that debate play out in the pages of the Daily Sceptic, much like it did in Lockdown Sceptics. I’m a free speech zealot. In February 2020, a couple of months before I created Lockdown Sceptics, I helped set up the Free Speech Union, a non-partisan, mass membership public interest body that stands up for the speech rights of its members and campaigns for free speech more widely. The timing was perfect since one of the hallmarks of the coronavirus crisis has been the suppression of dissenting voices within the scientific and public health communities – the creep of cancel culture into the hard sciences. That process was already underway, as any doctor who dissents from trans orthodoxy can tell you, but the pandemic acted like an accelerant. The Daily Sceptic, like Lockdown Sceptics, will campaign against this new climate of Maoist intolerance that is sweeping through our most important institutions and companies – and that includes taking the Mickey out of woke gobbledegook. Scientific censorship is a deadly serious business, but the way to take down the would-be Torquemadas is often to aim at the funny bone.
I hope you enjoy the new site. Do keep the contributions coming, both above and below the line. (Our email address remains the same.) And if you appreciate what we do, please help us keep the wolf from the door by making a donation. The Daily Sceptic, like Lockdown Sceptics, will be a labour of love, and the staff of seven is now a staff of five: me, Ian Rons, Will Jones, Noah Carl and Michael Curzon. But we also have wives and girlfriends and mortgages and families, and every little helps.
If you’re a subscriber to the daily email newsletter, you’ll still receive it but we are going to start sending it out from a new domain – DailySceptic.org – from tomorrow. So if you suddenly stop getting it, check your spam folder and if it’s in there move it to your inbox. After that, it should go straight to your inbox.
If you’re a below-the-line contributor, or someone who participates in the Forums, you’ll still be able to do that, but the site change means you’ll be logged out and you’ll need your username or password to log back in again. If you can’t remember them, just use the reset facility, although you’ll need to know one of them to reset the other. If you can’t remember either, email Ian Rons on lockdownsceptics@castironsolutions.co.uk.
The data we use to send out the daily email newsletter is owned by Lockdown Sceptics and we are transferring it to Skeptics Ltd, a company we’ve set up to publish the Daily Sceptic. We won’t be passing on this data to anyone else, but if you object to this transfer then please contact Ian Rons, our Data Protection Officer, at lockdownsceptics@castironsolutions.co.uk, within the next seven days and we’ll delete your data from our database.
When it was first suggested that Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak would need to self-isolate after coming into contact with Health Secretary Sajid Javid, who has tested positive for Covid, Downing Street reported that the pair would be exempt from the rule as part of a pilot scheme (how convenient!). They have since been forced to U-turn due to the backlash following the announcement and will spend ‘Freedom Day’ in isolation. Sky News has more.
“The Prime Minister has been contacted by NHS Test and Trace to say he is a contact of someone with Covid,” a spokesperson said.
“He was at Chequers when contacted by Test and Trace and will remain there to isolate. He will not be taking part in the testing pilot.
“He will continue to conduct meetings with ministers remotely. The Chancellor has also been contacted and will also isolate as required and will not be taking part in the pilot.”
Mr Sunak tweeted: “Whilst the test and trace pilot is fairly restrictive, allowing only essential Government business, I recognise that even the sense that the rules aren’t the same for everyone is wrong.
“To that end, I’ll be self-isolating as normal and not taking part in the pilot.” …
Mr Javid revealed on Saturday that he had tested positive for Covid – only a day after the Health Secretary reportedly met with Mr Johnson in Downing Street.
But this morning, Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick appeared on Sky News to defend Downing Street’s initial announcement that the PM and chancellor would not be isolating.
He said: “I appreciate the frustration [the public] might feel listening to this.
“They, like me, or other members of the public who are pinged will have to self-isolate in the usual way.”
Having seen Mr Jenrick sent on to the morning politics programmes to defend the original decision, Sky’s Political Correspondent Rob Powell described the situation as “baffling”.
“This is a pretty speedy U-turn,” he said.
While Mr Jenrick referred to being “pinged”, the PM and chancellor were in fact contacted by NHS Test and Trace directly rather than simply being alerted by the NHS Covid app.
That means that there is a legal obligation to self-isolate for 10 days, whereas being pinged by the app is only guidance. …
Mr Jenrick encouraged people to keep the app installed and self-isolate when pinged.
Isolation rules continue to wreak havoc – though it seemed for a moment that they wouldn’t affect the lives of our leaders. Some parents are taking their children out of school ahead of the summer break so as to remove the risk of the whole family having to quarantine because of a single positive Covid test in the classroom. A number of schools have also decided to take action by closing early or by moving again to online teaching. The Guardianhas the story.
“It is an absolutely grim situation and a depressing end to an academic year in which schools and colleges have been fighting to keep education running for their students despite waves of disruption caused by the pandemic,” said Geoff Barton, General Secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders.
“Schools are remaining open until the end of term where possible but we are hearing more reports of some having to close because of Covid-related cases and absence among pupils and staff.”
While many independent schools had already closed for the summer break some days ago, some state schools finished their term on July 16th, and others will continue to offer teaching for another week.
Official Government data published last week showed that 840,000 pupils were out of school self-isolating, the highest number since schools fully reopened in March. The figures reflect the continuing surge in infections across the country as well as the policy of sending home entire “bubbles” of children who have been in contact with a positive case, even though they have not tested positive themselves. These bubbles typically consist of either a single class or an entire year group.
The Government has said that from next week bubbles will no longer be required, while responsibility for contact tracing will be handed over to the NHS. However, self-isolation rules for those who are identified as close contacts of a Covid case, as well as those who are ‘pinged’ by the NHS app, will remain in place for another month for the whole population.
School leaders say they are exasperated by a lack of clear guidance from the Department for Education, which they feel shifts responsibility for determining what is best for the school and the local community on to them. Some have reported that parents are angry with approaches from schools which they believe to be inconsistent with the rules.
One headteacher at an infant school told the Observer that three-quarters of pupils and 12 staff members had been sent home over the last four weeks. Nearly a third of pupils who had only just returned to school last Monday after isolation were sent home again on Friday, with six staff members off.
He said 10% of children were currently off school for non-Covid reasons, with many of their parents phoning in to say they were worried about disruption to holiday and social plans, even though this would constitute an unauthorised absence. …
Local news reports showed that schools in Southend, Winchester, Swindon, Pembrokeshire and Salisbury have all been forced to close early and switch to online learning to prevent entire year groups from having to self-isolate and to deal with staff shortages. Meanwhile, findings from the app that surveys parents, Parent Ping, showed that on July 5th 15% were considering taking their children out of school.
All U.K. adults have been offered a first dose of a Covid vaccine a day ahead of schedule, the Government has announced. But the success of the national vaccine roll-out has not persuaded the Prime Minister to give back more freedoms on ‘Freedom Day’, with mask-wearing still to be encouraged and the introduction of vaccine passports in a number of domestic settings seemingly imminent. Sky News has the story.
The Department of Health and Social Care said more than 46.2 million people had now had a first dose (87.8% of the [adult] population), while 35.7 million had received both shots (67.8%).
Boris Johnson had set July 19th as the date to offer all over-18s a jab, as well as to fully vaccinate two in three people.
It has been met a day before most existing coronavirus restrictions end in England.
The Prime Minister said today’s milestone was an “extraordinary achievement” and that it comes just eight months after the first shot was administered.
“Thank you again to everyone coming forward, and to those helping others to get jabbed,” he said.
“You are the reason we are able to cautiously ease restrictions next week, and return closer towards normal life. Now let’s finish the job. If you’re over 18, book both your jabs today.”
Health Secretary Sajid Javid, who’s isolating after contracting the virus himself, said it was “testament to the sheer dedication of NHS teams and local volunteers” who’ve been giving out the jabs.
Every adult will now have the chance to be double-jabbed by mid-September, added the Department of Health.
However, according to a report in the Sunday Telegraph, ministers have decided against a mass vaccination of under-18s and will only offer a jab to those who are vulnerable.
A standard face masks act as nothing more than a “comfort blanket” and offers little protection against Covid, a scientific adviser to SAGE has said ahead of the partial easing of the mask mandate on Monday. The Telegraphhas the story.
Dr Colin Axon, who has advised the Government on minimising the risk of cross-infection in supermarkets, accused medics of presenting a “cartoonish” view of how tiny particles travel through the air.
He warned some cloth masks have gaps which are invisible to the naked eye, but are 500,000 times the size of viral Covid particles.
“The small sizes are not easily understood but an imperfect analogy would be to imagine marbles fired at builders’ scaffolding, some might hit a pole and rebound, but obviously most will fly through,” he told the Telegraph.
The mask debate has been reignited this week after the Government published “Freedom Day” guidance recommending their continued use. It led to Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, enforcing their continued use on the London Underground.
Dr Axon said the public need to be offered a wider view of the science behind face masks, rather than the “partial view” of information being pushed by medics over their effectiveness.
“Medics have this cartoonised view of how particles move through the air – it’s not their fault, it’s not their domain – they’ve got a cartoonish view of how the world is,” he said.
“Once a particle is not on a biological surface it is no longer a biomedical issue, it is simply about physics. The public has only a partial view of the story if information only comes from one type of source. Medics have some of the answers but not a whole view.” …
An Oxford study last summer concluded that masks were “effective” in reducing the spread of the virus.
However, other studies have cast doubt on their effectiveness. A subsequent Danish study involving 6,000 people concluded that there was no statistical difference in infection spread in non-wearers, while data on U.S. states with non-mandated usage failed to show a correlated uptick in cases.
“The public were demanding something must be done, they got masks, it is just a comfort blanket,” Dr Axon noted. “But now it is entrenched, and we are entrenching bad behaviour.”
It appears that the anticipated peak of the current surge in England has not yet arrived, and the recent slowdowns may have been temporary.
U.K. positive Covid tests by date reported
As of today, ZOE data is now beginning to show the uptick in infections that Government data has shown over the past week, reversing what had appeared to be (including to ZOE lead scientist Tim Spector) the early signs of a declining trend.
Early Indian variant hotspot Bolton, which had peaked and gone into decline in mid-May, is now spiking again.
Bolton positive Covid tests by specimen date
Localities as far apart as Carlisle, Rushcliffe in Nottinghamshire and North Devon and also surging.
Carlisle positive Covid tests by specimen dateRushcliffe positive Covid tests by specimen dateNorth Devon positive Covid tests by specimen date
Neil Ferguson popped up again yesterday morning to predict up to 200,000 ‘cases’ a day in the not-so-distant future. However, it’s important to recognise that the ‘case’ figures for this surge are not comparable to those of earlier surges as testing numbers are now almost double what they were before March when mass testing with lateral flow devices came in.
Test positivity is currently only around 3%, according to Our World in Data, compared with around 7.7% at the autumn peak and 12.8% at the winter peak.
Nonetheless, there can be no doubt this is a real virus surge, despite being summer – the Delta variant appears not to be as afraid of the sunshine as other variants. As of July 10th the ONS infection survey has both England and Scotland on just over 1% community prevalence of COVID-19.
Interestingly Scotland’s decline in reported positive tests has continued, holding out hope that 1-2% prevalence may be the peak of this surge.
Scotland positive Covid tests by date reported
U.K. Hospital admissions are still relatively low but are now increasing. Deaths are still very low, though up a bit.
U.K Covid hospital admissions
So once again we’re left waiting to see how high it will go, and what impact it will have on hospital admissions and deaths. One difference this time though is restrictions are being lifted during the surge, not imposed, so we may finally have a clear test in this country of the theory that restrictions are necessary to bring infections down. The fact that ‘Freedom Day’ in any form is going ahead despite the ongoing surge is a sign of the strength of scepticism in Government and among Conservative MPs. Many are determined that now the vulnerable are vaccinated there can be no further justification for lockdowns, however high infections get, as what then would we be locking down for?
Why has this surge been wavier than previous ones, with a number of temporary plateaus or short term declines that were mistaken for peaks? Is it the warmer weather making progress more faltering? Is it the vaccines causing unexpected changes in the course of the epidemic, with the surge in the vaccinated coming later than in the unvaccinated? Could it even be all the gatherings for Euro 2020 putting rocket boosters under the spread? Or something else?
As so often, the drivers of the epidemic remain somewhat mysterious. Nonetheless, Scotland’s continued decline gives hope the peak is not too far away. Let’s hope so, as surges are always great for those who want an excuse to push through more Covid nonsense.
The Question Everything Lockdown Summit took place in London yesterday and featured contributions from many of the lockdown sceptics that have featured prominently on this site over the past year, including Professor David Paton, Professor David Livermore, Dr Clare Craig, Toby and myself. The full video recording (nine hours) is now up on Dan Astin-Gregory’s YouTube channel to watch at leisure. The schedule ran as follows, with time stamps within the links.
“Questions and Answers” – Jon Dobinson, Professor Karol Sikora, Professor David Paton, Luke Johnson, Dr Zenobia Storah, Dr Clare Craig, Professor Norman Fenton, and Nick Hudson
We’re publishing an original piece today by Dr. David Livermore, Professor of Medical Microbiology at the University of East Anglia, a member of HART, and a contributor to Collateral Global, about Covid status certificates – or vaccine passports to you and me. He’s not opposed to immigration officers demanding to see evidence that you’ve been double jabbed or tested negative as a condition of entering their country. But he does draw the line at internal use of vaccine passports – as a condition of attending a pop concert, for instance. He’s done a back-of-the-envelope calculation and concluded that admitting the unvaccinated, who will soon make up no more than 10% of the population, won’t pose a major risk and in any event will be outnumbered by the vaccinated who can still transmit the disease.
Suppose a concert is attended by 1,000 people, 900 vaccinated and 100 unvaccinated, which is about the current split. Assume also that vaccines confer around 80% protection – 95% for Pfizer and Moderna and 63-76% for AZ, and that 20% of the unvaccinated are immune through prior infection.
On that basis, the audience will include 80 unvaccinated ‘vulnerables’ and 180 potential vaccine failures. In other words, unvaccinated ‘hazards’ are outnumbered 2:1 by the vaccinated ‘hazards’. ZOE app data, showing that infections in the (large) vaccinated population are beginning to outnumber those in the (small and diminishing) unvaccinated population illustrate how, nationally, we are on track to reach such ratios.
In these circumstances, excluding the unvaccinated won’t dramatically alter the risk to the audience. Rather, the good news is that 740 of the 1000 attendees ([80% x 900]+[20% x 100]) are protected by successful vaccination or prior infection and this proportion, replicated across the population outside, should give sufficient herd immunity to prevent the virus regaining traction. Moreover, it’s generally accepted that vaccination gives better than 80% protection against severe infection, meaning that the vaccinated vulnerables aren’t at much risk.
As for the 80 unvaccinated vulnerables, have we not reached the point where it is their business if they choose to hazard more severe infection? They may also smoke or drink excessively. Or, despite limited mountaineering experience, join a commercial climb of Mt Everest, as promoted by this Everest Expedition service, whose blurb includes the wonderful encouragement: “If you want to experience what it feels like to be on the highest point on the planet and have strong economic background to compensate for your old age and your fear of risks, you can sign up for the VVIP Mount Everest Expedition Service.”
“Nightclubs throw open their doors as Freedom Day arrives” – Thousands have eagerly piled onto dance floors for the first time since March last year, MailOnline reports, but as many as 73% of clubbers say they don’t want to return quite yet
“Athletics-Britain’s Butchart gets suspended ban in ‘faked’ Covid test row” – U.K. Athletics handed 5,000 metres runner Andrew Butchart a suspension after he admitted to changing the date on a Covid test result to get back into the U.K. He will be able to compete in the Olympics, Reuters reports
“Church of England vicar, 52, faces the sack for breaking Covid rules” – The Reverend Charlie Boyle may be sacked from his job and forced out of the vicarage where he and his family have lived for eight years, according to the Mail On Sunday, for hugging a mourner and singing a hymn without a mask
“The art of selling vaccines” – In the Spectator, Laura Dodsworth takes aim at the use of places of worship, shops, sport venues, and art galleries as vaccine centres. It makes the public health service “more like a creepy cult”, she says
“Mike Yeadon, a vilified prophet of our times” – The Conservative Woman’s Kathy Gyngell celebrates the moral courage of the former Pfizer research scientist who has been “subjected to a campaign of vilification and smears”
“The Endgame” – Bournbrook contributors S.D. Wickett and Luke Perry discuss the culmination of a global crisis; mandatory vaccinations, civil unrest and internet freedom in the latest episode of Week in Review
“France tempts teens with chance to shoot-’em-up” – Authorities in Avignon in southern France are trying to tempt 12- to 30-year-olds to get jabbed by with a chance to win tickets to a concert and a chance to try out military helicopter and target-shooting simulations, the Sunday Times reports
“Dogs debut on Cannes red carpet to detect COVID-19” – The Cannes Film Festival is only admitting the fully vaccinated and those with a negative COVID-19 test, the Telegraph says, but as an additional precaution there will be specially trained dogs at the event to sniff out Covid
“No need for mandatory vaccinations or vaccine passports” – “Vaccine passports will be needed for international travel as countries demand to know who is coming across their borders,” says Brian Lilley in the Toronto Sun. “That is vastly different from being forced to show your vaccine status to a waiter before ordering dinner on a night out”
“Is the State Your Single Source of Truth?” – Writing for the AIER, David McGrogan, a Lockdown Sceptics regular, responds to Prime Minister Jacinda Adern’s recent statement that her Government will continue to be “the single source of truth” for the people of New Zealand
“The Panic Pandemic” – “Fearmongering from journalists, scientists, and politicians did more harm than the virus,” says John Tierney in City Journal
“South Korea to bring home sailors aboard virus-hit destroyer” – South Korea on Sunday is replacing the entire 301-member crew of a navy destroyer on an anti-piracy mission off East Africa, AP News reports, after nearly 70 of them tested positive for Covid
Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon in Wuthering Heights
We have created some Lockdown Sceptics Forums, including a dating forum called “Love in a Covid Climate” that has attracted a bit of attention. We have a team of moderators in place to remove spam and deal with the trolls, but sometimes it takes a little while so please bear with us. You have to register to use the Forums as well as post comments below the line, but that should just be a one-time thing. Any problems, email Lockdown Scepticshere.
Social Media Accounts
You can follow Lockdown Sceptics on our social media accounts which are updated throughout the day. To follow us on Facebook, click here; to follow us on Twitter, click here; to follow us on Instagram, click here; to follow us on Parler, click here (temporarily disabled); and to follow us on MeWe, click here.
Woke Gobbledegook
We’ve decided to create a permanent slot down here for woke gobbledegook. Today, we are flagging the Mail On Sunday’s report on some of the episodes which have been recorded as non-crime hate incidents, from whistling the theme tune of Bob the Builder to leaving a burger bun on the driveway. They break no law but they’re kept on people’s records for six years, and can be disclosed to prospective employers.
A man has been landed with a police record for ‘racial hatred’ for whistling the Bob The Builder theme tune at his neighbour.
Officers in Bedfordshire recorded the incident as a non-crime hate incident, which will remain on file for six years and could be disclosed to prospective employers.
Few other details about the “crime” are known, but it is just one of the bizarre cases unearthed by an investigation into the controversial practice of recording “hate incidents” even if no law has been broken.
Others include a swimming teacher in West Yorkshire given a police record after a child’s mother claimed her son had been allowed to bang his head against the side of the pool “due to his ethnicity”, and a gay man who alleged he had been ripped off by a drug dealer because of his sexuality.
In Norfolk, a Portuguese national said an unknown person had deliberately left a burger bun on their driveway “due to their ethnicity”.
Under the Hate Crime Operational Guidelines, adopted in 2014, forces are required to record any actions deemed to be motivated by an element of hate, even if there is no evidence to prove them.
In total, 10,840 non-crime hate incidents were logged last year, bringing the total in the past five years to 120,000 – but Freedom of Information requests sent to 43 police forces in England and Wales failed to identify a single crime that had been solved as a result.
Campaigners have called for the “Orwellian” system to be scrapped, claiming a police record could jeopardise a person’s career even if they were not charged with a crime.
Stop Press: In the New York Post, Jon Levine has investigated some of the teaching vacancies currently being advertised by some of the city’s prestigious private schools. They are thoroughly woke.
Many of New York City’s once-vaunted private schools are hunting for the next generation of woke educators to preach the gospel of anti-racism and critical race theory, a review of job applications by the Post shows.
Leading the way is Ethical Culture Fieldston School, which is on the market for a ballet instructor “committed to challenging Western dance forms and the hierarchical and pedagogical practices that often centre whiteness in dance classrooms and on stages”, according to a job description posted to the school’s website.
Even science at Fieldston – a Bronx institution where tuition is $55,510 a year – has not been spared the progressive mandate. A posting seeking an upper school biology teacher said applicants should have “an understanding of and commitment to cultural competency, and how to support a diverse student population, especially through teaching more inclusive science curricula”.
A rep for Fieldston did not respond to a request asking for clarification about what an “inclusive science curricula” was.
STEM subjects face a similar wokening at Grace Church School – $57,330 a year – in downtown Manhattan, where wanted Math and Science Centre consultants must have a “commitment to antiracism and accessibility of student education for diverse learners”.
One of the responsibilities listed for a secretary position at the $58,350-a-year Riverdale Country School is to proofread report cards “for proper use of pronouns”. …
Riverdale’s opening for a Lower School associate teacher stresses the need for applicants “committed to work in the areas of equity, justice, and inclusion”.
The $58,505-a-year Trinity School on the Upper West Side made similar demands of applicants for their elementary teachers:
“Candidates need… to create an equitable classroom culture inclusive of varied student experiences as well as an awareness of how race, gender, and other aspects of identity manifest themselves in the early childhood classroom,” a job description reads. The school says it is “expressly committed to becoming an anti-racist institution”.
A rep for Trinity defended its standards.
“We have a diverse student body and on a daily basis we want to make sure that all students in every classroom feel safe and loved,” spokesman Kevin Ramsey told The Post.
Stop Press 2: The American Booksellers’ Association sent a promotional letter to 750 retailers that prompted an angry backlash over the inclusion of Abigail Shrier’s bestseller, Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters. The Association swiftly followed up with a grovelling apology. Geraldine Massey has the story in her ‘What’s Woke This Week’ column in Spectator Australia.
The American Booksellers’ Association each month sends a promotional selection of books to member retail outlets. July’s selection included a copy of journalist Abigail Shrier’s bestselling critical analysis of the treatment of gender dysphoria, Irreversible Damage: the Transgender Craze Seducing our Daughters.
Overwrought melodramatic Twitter feedback from woke booksellers ensued. Quelle surprise! And the ABA’s response? Pathetic, grovelling capitulation won out over a spirited defence of free speech:
“An anti-trans book was included in our July mailing to members. This is a serious, violent incident that goes against ABA’s ends policies, values, and everything we believe and support. It is inexcusable.”
“We apologise to our trans members and to the trans community for this terrible incident and the pain we caused them. We also apologise to the LGBTQIA+ community at large, and to our bookselling community. Apologies are not enough. We’ve begun addressing this today and are committed to engaging in the critical dialogue needed to inform concrete steps to address the harm we caused.”
One could be forgiven for thinking that an army of savage books had jumped out of boxes and physically attacked hapless booksellers who were no match for their bigoted ferocity, armed as they were with only an array of pronouns and gender flags.
Douglas Murray was equally unimpressed by the American Booksellers’ Association.
Stop Press 3: Laurence Fox’s Reclaim Party is publishing a new policy document today arguing that Free Speech should be given legal protection in order to break the tide of cancel culture, the Sun reports. It was written by lockdown sceptic lawyer Francis Hoar and has a forward by Lord Sumption.
“Mask Exempt” Lanyards
We’ve created a one-stop shop down here for people who want to obtain a “Mask Exempt” lanyard/card – because wearing a mask causes them “severe distress”, for instance. You can print out and laminate a fairly standard one for free here and the Government has instructions on how to download an official “Mask Exempt” notice to put on your phone here. And if you feel obliged to wear a mask but want to signal your disapproval of having to do so, you can get a “sexy world” mask with the Swedish flag on it here.
A reader has started a website that contains some useful guidance about how you can claim legal exemption. Another reader has created an Android app which displays “I am exempt from wearing a face mask” on your phone. Available free of charge.
If you’re a shop owner and you want to let your customers know you will not be insisting on face masks or asking them what their reasons for exemption are, you can download a friendly sign to stick in your window here.
And here’s an excellent piece about the ineffectiveness of masks by a Roger W. Koops, who has a doctorate in organic chemistry. See also the Swiss Doctor’s thorough review of the scientific evidence here and Prof Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson’s Spectator article about the Danish mask study here.
Stop Press: The Telegraph reports that confusion abounds as businesses and public transport networks set their own requirements for face masks.
Passengers face a chaotic commute on ‘Freedom Day’ after rail bosses said face masks must be worn on busy platforms but can be removed if boarding a quiet train.
The Government has removed the legal requirement for people to wear masks on public transport and in shops and other indoor spaces from Monday. Instead, guidance says it “expects and recommends” people to wear masks in these settings.
The move has left businesses with the responsibility of setting their own requirements on whether they expect customers to wear masks.
The Rail Delivery Group, which represents passenger and freight rail companies, said passengers would be encouraged to wear masks when stations are busy. Many rail operators have said they will expect passengers to put on masks when in a crowded carriage.
It raises the prospect of passengers having to put on and then remove coverings throughout a journey, depending which rail service or station they are using and how busy it is.
Stop Press 2: Dr. Gary Sidley attacked masks on NTD News, telling viewers that the evidence they reduce viral transmission is “weak and inconsistent” at best.
Stop Press 3: Psychologist Emma Kenny told GB News that masks have a negative impact on child development and on people with sensory issues.
The Great Barrington Declaration
Professor Martin Kulldorff, Professor Sunetra Gupta and Professor Jay Bhattacharya
The Great Barrington Declaration, a petition started by Professor Martin Kulldorff, Professor Sunetra Gupta and Professor Jay Bhattacharya calling for a strategy of “Focused Protection” (protect the elderly and the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with life), was launched in October and the lockdown zealots have been doing their best to discredit it ever since. If you googled it a week after launch, the top hits were three smear pieces from the Guardian, including: “Herd immunity letter signed by fake experts including ‘Dr Johnny Bananas’.” (Freddie Sayers at UnHerdwarned us about this the day before it appeared.) On the bright side, Google UK has stopped shadow banning it, so the actual Declaration now tops the search results – and Toby’s Spectator piece about the attempt to suppress it is among the top hits – although discussion of it has been censored by Reddit. In February, Facebook deleted the GBD’s page because it “goes against our community standards”. The reason the zealots hate it, of course, is that it gives the lie to their claim that “the science” only supports their strategy. These three scientists are every bit as eminent – more eminent – than the pro-lockdown fanatics so expect no let up in the attacks. (Wikipedia has also done a smear job.)
You can find it here. Please sign it. Now over three quarters of a million signatures.
Update: The authors of the GBD have expanded the FAQs to deal with some of the arguments and smears that have been made against their proposal. Worth reading in full.
Update 2: Many of the signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration are involved with new UK anti-lockdown campaign Recovery. Find out more and join here.
Update 3: You can watch Sunetra Gupta set out the case for “Focused Protection” here and Jay Bhattacharya make it here.
Update 4: The three GBD authors plus Prof Carl Heneghan of CEBM have launched a new website collateralglobal.org, “a global repository for research into the collateral effects of the COVID-19 lockdown measures”. Follow Collateral Global on Twitter here.
Stop Press: Professor Jay Bhattacharya, editor-in-chief of Collateral Global, has sat down with Lord Sumption to discuss the legal and ethical questions presented by the policy response to COVID-19, the historical context and the potential ramifications.
Judicial Reviews Against the Government
There are now so many legal cases being brought against the Government and its ministers we thought we’d include them all in one place down here.
The Simon Dolan case has now reached the end of the road, and it looks as though the Robin Tilbrook case has too. Neither claimant was granted permission for a judicial review against the Government, unfortunately, although Tilbrook says he’s going to appeal.
The GoodLawProject and three MPs – Debbie Abrahams, Caroline Lucas and Layla Moran – brought a Judicial Review against Matt Hancock for failing to publish details of lucrative contracts awarded by his department and it was upheld. The Court ruled Hancock had acted unlawfully.
Lawyers for more than 2,000 families who lost loved ones during the pandemic are taking legal action to try to force the Prime Minister to hold an immediate public inquiry into the government’s handling of the crisis. The group, called COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK, is seeking permission for a Judicial Review. The group’s lawyers are arguing that the Government has a duty under human rights law to hold an urgent judge-led statutory inquiry, because there is evidence that thousands of people died needlessly as a result of decisions taken by ministers. You can read more about that group and contribute to the fundraiser here.
Then there’s John’s Campaign which is focused specifically on care homes and began a legal process to challenge guidance which recommends that care home residents who go on visits outside should isolate for 14 days upon their return. The Government’s initial response stated that this was was not a legal requirement, and that it is up to individuals care homes to determine how best to protect residents from Covid. On May 1st it was reported that the guidance was going to change to no longer recommend the period of self isolation after a visit to a garden or an outdoor space, such as a park or a beach. Read more about the case and get updates here.
Scottish Church leaders from a range of Christian denominations judicially reviewed the decision of the Scottish Government to close churches, supported by the Christian Legal Centre. The church leaders argued that it was a disproportionate step, and one which has serious implications for freedom of religion. The review was upheld, with the judge ruling on March 23rd, 2021 that that the Scottish Ministers’ decision to ban and criminalise gathered worship was unconstitutional and a disproportionate interference in worshippers Article 9 ECHR rights. Read more about the victory here.
There’s the class action lawsuit being brought by Dr Reiner Fuellmich and his team in various countries against “the manufacturers and sellers of the defective product, PCR tests”. Dr Fuellmich explains the lawsuit in this video. Dr Fuellmich has also served cease and desist papers on Professor Christian Drosten, co-author of the Corman-Drosten paper which was the first and WHO-recommended PCR protocol for detection of SARS-CoV-2. That paper, which was pivotal to the roll out of mass PCR testing, was submitted to the journal Eurosurveillance on January 21st and accepted following peer review on January 22nd. The paper has been critically reviewed here by Pieter Borger and colleagues, who also submitted a retraction request which has now been rejected. The Jerm Warfare blog has published an interview with Reiner Fuellmich about his plans to take the World Health Organisation, and others, to court for “crimes against humanity”.
Hugh Osmond, the founder of Punch Taverns and a former director of Pizza Express, and Sacha Lord, Greater Manchester’s night time economy adviser submitted a claim for a Judicial Review about the fact that indoor hospitality venues have had to remain closed for weeks longer than non-essential shops in England. Their case was initially expedited, but on May 3rd, 2021 it was dismissed on the grounds that, by then, the hearing could not take place until after May 17th, the date on which the sector would be permitted to reopen.
Law Firm PGMBM is acting on behalf of an NHS worker, a pensioner and a gig economy worker to challenge the Government’s charges for hotel quarantine for residents coming into the UK from a red list country. Read about that case, and support it, here.
Lawyers from the Law or Fiction group launched a legal challenge against a multi-academy trust in Sheffield to try and stop children having to wear masks in school, but were unsuccessful. You can read about the judge’s decision on Law or Fiction’s CrowdJustice page here.
The Law or Fiction group is also bringing a case against an employer who’s made the vaccine mandatory. It relates to Barchester Healthcare which is planning to impose a ‘No Jab, No Job’ policy on its 17,000 staff. Read more about that case and support it here.
And last but not least there was the Free Speech Union‘s challenge to Ofcom over its ‘coronavirus guidance’. A High Court judge refused permission for the FSU’s judicial review on December 9th and the FSU has decided not to appeal the decision. Check here for details.
Stop Press: Debbie Hicks, the anti-lockdown campaigner who was arrested after posting a video on Facebook of a recording she’d made of a largely empty ward at Gloucester Royal Hospital, is facing trial and has started a fundraiser to help pay for her legal defence. You can donate here.
Samaritans
If you are struggling to cope, please call Samaritans for free on 116 123 (UK and ROI), email jo@samaritans.org or visit the Samaritans website to find details of your nearest branch. Samaritans is available round the clock, every single day of the year, providing a safe place for anyone struggling to cope, whoever they are, however they feel, whatever life has done to them.
Shameless Begging Bit
Thanks as always to those of you who made a donation in the past 24 hours to pay for the upkeep of this site. Doing these daily updates is hard work (although we have help from lots of people, mainly in the form of readers sending us stories and links). If you feel like donating, please click here. And if you want to flag up any stories or links we should include in future updates, email us here. (Don’t assume we’ll pick them up in the comments.)
And Finally…
What would Boris Johnson the Telegraph columnist and fierce advocate for liberty make of Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister who put the country in lockdown? To find out, Kate Andrews spoke to Boris’s former colleague and ex-girlfriend Petronella Wyatt on the latest edition of Spectator TV. Boris does have an instinctively liberal set of beliefs, she confirmed, but they “are not so deeply held that they can’t be sacrifice for what he sees as political expediency”. If he were still a Spectator journalist, however, he would be decrying the restrictions as “an appalling restriction of freedom”. The old Boris, she says, “would be hating himself as Prime Minister”.
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, you have posted your model and warned that we are entering a period where totalitarianism is the objective into 2032. Can you explain perhaps in more detail what that means?
Thank you for your courage in these times
WH
ANSWER: While everyone is focused on COVID and arguing that there is no virus or that it is easily treated without vaccination, they are missing the real objective – our descent into a state of tyrannical psychosis that creates the totalitarian rule. The totalitarian state has a standard playbook. First, they need to create fear. This is then followed by terrorizing the people. Lastly, they will then seek power by offering solutions that require the surrender of all your rights for security. This is what Ben Franklin was really referring to.
We are told to social distance and to wear masks, but this not merely defies the scientific truth as the Washington Post reported on the studies from the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic that masks were “useless” yet they have demanded we comply. Why? This is to prevent civil uprisings (resistance) against their goals. In France, they have set up roadblocks all to prevent protests – that is ruthless totalitarian tactics unfit for an elected democratic state. They set up roadblocks during World War II for the very same reason. This is Pavlov’s Dog. Training is achieved through isolation and conditioning.
I recommend reading, The Power of the Powerless by Vaclav Havel. He was a dissident who lived in Czechoslovakia under communist rule. In his youth, Havel had been denied various educational opportunities due to his family’s intellectual and bourgeois upbringing. Stalin feared intellectuals and even had Kondratieff executed because his cycle work warned that the communist state would collapse. So, Havel instead found himself writing internationally acclaimed plays. In spite of clear fears and frustrations, Havel was carving out a life for himself. It was this trend that caught on and people began to see the Communist state for what it truly was – tyranny not freedom nor parental state care. Video Player00:0000:44
You will not understand totalitarianism until you see it live. As I have said before, I went behind the Berlin Wall before it fell. I saw it with my own eyes. The power of rulers is constructed on FEAR. This is precisely what they have begun with using COVID. I am not the only one who understands how to create a totalitarian state. This is no secret. Others have studied this as well and the steps are very clear. They are using this model to redesign the world for climate change and while they are at it, they seek to recreate a communist state thanks to Schwab’s ideas but they assume it failed before because it did not engulf the entire world. Hence, the entire world must be vaccinated. This is the reality behind the curtain.
Havel offers a view of how still the totalitarian state can be defeated. Unlike most dictatorships which are locally created by military power, the Communist dictatorship behaved like a “secularized religion” which was a key observation from within. Communism covered a broad area of diverse cultures, yet it professed to be rooted in historical socialist movements. Its godfathers were Marx and Engels who were raised to god-like status. It is true that there was conventional and nuclear weaponry that was the ultimate trump card in this game of power. Nonetheless, the glue that holds it all together is not the military power, but the social pressures and indoctrination that enable this totalitarian order to be maintained.
Often the people who are the totalitarian rulers NEVER see themselves as evil. They see that their idea will save society. Because the French demanded vengeance upon Germany in World War I and insisted on ruinous reparation payments that punished the people rather than the political leaders, they set the stage for Hitler to rise because of their oppression. You should NEVER punish the people for the behavior of their leader for the people are suppressed with fear and conditioned to the point where menticide takes place.
Stanley Milgram established the fallacy that the Germans killed the Jews because somehow they were different. He conducted that experiment and found that people in the United States would also torture people if they were told to do so by an authority. That was his book – Obedience to Authority. All the german guards when asked simply responded they were following orders. That was their mindset and it is critical to understand that this is the very key to creating a totalitarian state. They have been using this COVID to achieve their goal of brainwashing people and dividing society into groups so they will not ban together to rise up against their master. So we have Black Lives Matter which helps to divide society by race. They will also induce divisions on religion and try to turn others against the religious right they are characterizing as the neo-Nazis of today. They are against religion just as the Communists were for religion leads to prayer and the belief in a savior from about rather than the rulers of the totalitarian state.
The Salem Witch Hunts were a classic model of totalitarian power. They created the fear that there were witches controlled by the devil threatening their society. People turned against one another as they are doing today. In Britain, they told people to report if they saw their neighbor leave their house. These tactics are well known. What they are doing right now is taken out of this totalitarian playbook.
One important weapon in fighting totalitarianism is HUMOR. You must ridicule the leaders and expose them for what they truly are for in their mind they are not evil, you are just unruly. The COVID trick is starting to decline for there has been no massive death wave. They will next move onto climate change and expect air travel to rise in price dramatically. They are trying to reduce international travel and will most likely impose restrictions on the number of flights and new taxes destined to double the prices. We will even see air travel domestically rise in price. They are also deliberately trying to reduce meat and are paying farmers not to grow food to create a panic that they will then link to climate change.
We MUST strive to spread the word and to expose the fact that they have lied about COVID. But don’t get involved with claims it is not a virus, has not been isolated, and all that line of reasoning. It will lead nowhere and it misses the entire point. This is a plot and the fact that they are insisting on this vaccine is part of the powerplay to separate the mindless sheep from those who think first, and question those in power who never tell the truth about anything anyway. Getting involved with is it a virus or not is distracting and it will not win the day. They will bring out a fake doctor who has been paid to refute anything you say.
Our politicians may even be oblivious to the goals here for they are NOT the people who have dreamed up this plot. That is coming from the World Economic Forum, Gates, and Soros who have used money and influence to trick most of the world into this direction, and like Hitler, they do not see themselves as evil, but the savior of the world. We are just too stupid to know what is best for us.
When I was invited to the private debut of Schwab’s movie the Forum, it shocked me for this was supposed to be about his 50 years of accomplishment. It turned out to be a promo for the Great Reset where Schwab invited Greta and Jeniffer Morgan of Green Peace to play a major role in selling the true agenda – climate change. That film debuted in New York and was the kick-off for the Great Reset. I thanked Schwab for the invite and we shook hands and he thanked me for coming. Like so many events in my life, I have seemed to be at the key spot where things began like being called in back in 1985 to start the G5 – now G20. I suppose I was at the event that started the move for the Great Reset as well.
We must take a step back and look at this strategy for what it is. They have conditioned society and we still see a few people wearing masks because they have been brainwashed and it now makes them “feel” safe. Handshakes have been replaced by elbow-bumping that contributes to social distancing to prevent gatherings that could result in uprisings. Understand the game plan. Use HUMOR to ridicule them. Remember, resistance is not futile.
Au milieu des années 2000, quelques années après mes premiers pas sur Internet avec le site Résistancenet.org en 1999, je me suis proposé de poursuivre l’expérience du commentaire occasionnel de l’actualité mondiale à travers ce petit blog, et je continue aujourd’hui, dans le respect du IXe commandement du Décalogue qui interdit le faux témoignage (un commandement que tant de publicistes négligent). Ce blog vous donnera peut-être envie aussi de lire mes livres sur la Serbie, le Béarn, la Transnistrie, l’Abkhazie, les régimes populistes… (et pour une présentation plus vivante des contenus de ce blog n’hésitez pas à vous abonner gratuitement à TV Delorca sur You Tube !)
L’Union européenne vient d’annoncer un durcissement de sa politique d’électrification des automobiles (12 % des émissions totales de CO2 de l’UE) qui pourrait inclure l’interdiction des ventes de voitures à essence et diesel d’ici vingt ans. Selon Bloomberg, « les nouveaux objectifs d’émissions des véhicules constitueraient un durcissement significatif par rapport aux objectifs d’émissions actuels pour l’ensemble du parc automobile, qui exigent une réduction de 37,5 % à partir de 2030 pour les voitures ». Il s’agit d’une étape supplémentaire dans la transformation à marche forcée de nos économies, au nom d’un prétendu réchauffement climatique dont la réalité fait pourtant encore débat chez les rares scientifiques indépendants de tout conflit d’intérêt (voir John Colerman face à ses contradicteurs de CNN).
Dans le cadre du Green Deal (Pacte Vert, inspiré du Green New Deal défendu par la gauche du Parti démocrate aux Etats-Unis et en Europe par par le mouvement transnational du « Printemps européen » de Benoit Hamon et Yanis Varoufakis – un cas intéressant de récupération des idées de gauche par le Big Business comme on l’avait déjà vu avec Soros) approuvé par le Conseil européen les 12-13 décembre 2019, l’Europe prévoit de devenir en 2050 le premier continent à émissions nettes de carbone nulles au monde. En octobre 2020, le slovène Janez Potočnik, ex commissaire européen pour l’environnement aujourd’hui employé du groupe d’audit Systemiq dirigé par un ancien de McKinsey se réjouissait (comme le World Economic Forum avec son « grand reset ») de ce que l’épidémie de Covid puisse accélérer la réalisation de cet agenda. Il stigmatise au passage les « comportements extrêmes », terme qui désigne à ses yeux tous ceux qui oseront s’opposer à cette révolution, et reprend à son compte contre eux la phrase de Bertrand Russell : « Tout le problème du monde, écrivait Bertrand Russell, c’est que les imbéciles et les fanatiques (lunatics) sont toujours si sûrs d’eux-mêmes, et les sages si pleins de doutes. » Cela en dit long sur le respect que ces gens accordent à leurs opposants politiques. On ne s’étonnera pas non plus de trouver sous la plume du propagandiste un hommage appuyé à Blackrock, la plus grosse société de gestion d’actifs et d’investissements au monde avec près de 7 800 milliards dirigée par un ancien conseiller de Trump, qui a beaucoup trempé dans le financement de milices privées (notons aussi que fut reçu le 25 octobre 2017 à l’Elysée – et elle a un regard intéressé sur nos retraites pour les fonds de pension qu’elle gère). En novembre dernier la Commission européenne a engagé cette société pour un audit sur la finance durable, alors qu’elle a pourtant de nombreux intérêts dans les combustibles fossiles comme Exxon et des entreprises responsables de la déforestation (voir le rapport du Médiateur européen à ce sujet). En janvier dernier le responsable de Blackrock dans sa lettre annuelle aux PDG a insisté sur le fait que le «changement tectonique» vers les entreprises axées sur le développement durable s’accélère à la suite de la pandémie de coronavirus, et les a sommés de publier leur « business model » pour arriver à une émission de carbone nette nulle.
Le 9 juillet dernier lors d’un discours prononcé lors de la 37ème conférence annuelle de Sun Valley dans l’Idaho Bill Gates devant le fondateur de Facebook Mark Zuckerberg, le PDG d’Apple Tim Cook, le co-fondateur de Nike Phil Knight et le PDG d’Amazon Jeff Bezos a aussi plaidé pour des mesures radicales contre le « réchauffement climatique ».
Tous ces milliardaires qui usent et abusent de leurs jets privés (que l’Union européenne exemptera de taxe sur le fuel – voir l’Irish Times du 13 juillet) et qui, tout en prônant « l’économie circulaire », s’obstinent à ériger le libre-échange très pollueur en dogme, continuent donc de nous mettre le pistolet sur la tempe, alors pourtant que des écologistes comme Jancovici expliquent que même avec un confinement dur tous les ans du type de celui de 2020 les objectifs ne peuvent pas être atteints… à moins bien sûr qu’on ne réduise massivement la population, ce qui est probablement le véritable objectif de ces nihilistes.
Les inondations en Allemagne et en Belgique ont été récemment pour eux et pour Ursula von der Leyen l’occasion de continuer à sonner le tocsin pour maintenir la pression sur les peuples. Certains se demandent si les scientifiques qui se vantent de réfléchir à des modifications du climat par des épandages en haute atmosphère ne seraient pas capables de provoquer ce genre d’inondation, de même que le dispositif HAARP – High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program en Alaska (je vous en parlais déjà il y a 13 ans, du temps où j’écrivais beaucoup plus de bêtises qu’aujourd’hui sous couvert de « rationalité »). En août 1996, l’US Air Force avait élaboré un document prospectif intitulé « Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 » (la météo comme multiplicateur de force : posséder la météo en 2025) rapport rédigé par le colonel Tamzy J. House, le lieutenant colonel James B. Near Jr et d’autres officiers. Son résumé indiquait : « En 2025, les forces aérospatiales américaines pourront « s’approprier la météo » en capitalisant sur les technologies émergentes et en concentrant le développement de ces technologies sur les applications de combat. Une telle capacité offre aux combattants des outils pour façonner l’espace de bataille d’une manière jamais possible auparavant. Il offre des opportunités d’avoir un impact sur les opérations dans tout le spectre des conflits et est pertinent pour tous les futurs possibles. Le but de cet article est de décrire une stratégie pour l’utilisation d’un futur système de modification du temps/de la météo en vue d’atteindre des objectifs militaires plutôt que de fournir une feuille de route technique détaillée. »
Le débat a souvent surgi aux Etats-Unis à propos des ouragans, et aussi du blizzard texan l’hiver dernier. Le magazine Der Spiegel du 11 août 1986 (n°33…) montrait déjà la cathédrale de Cologne presque submergée. Du predictive programming ?
Je rappelle que chronique, au sens médical, signifie « qui dure longtemps, se répète ». En fait vous allez en prendre pour la vie, et ils vont peut-être même vous la prendre…
OUI, une obligation vaccinale porte atteinte à l’intégrité de la personne.
OUI, cette obligation concerne autant les vaccinés que les non vaccinés car elle s’inscrit dans un calendrier sans fin (troisième dose et puis de « variant en variant », selon le Président de la République le 12 juillet 2021)
NON, cette obligation ne répond à aucun but légitime puisque les solutions vaccinales ont montré leur inefficacité face au variant delta en Israël notamment.
Hahahahahaha, ces histoires de complots qui sont vrais sont assez cocasses, enfin façon de parler.
Nom de code ?
« Projet Pegasus » : révélations sur un système mondial d’espionnage de téléphones
Ce n’est pas de moi, c’est du Monde, donc c’est sérieux et non-complotiste.
Qu’apprend-on ?
« Le Monde » et seize autres rédactions ont eu accès à plus de 50 000 numéros de téléphone potentiellement ciblés par Pegasus, un puissant logiciel espion israélien, pour le compte d’une dizaine d’Etats. Une arme numérique utilisée contre des journalistes, des avocats, des militants et des responsables politiques de nombreux pays, dont la France.
C’est un annuaire ahurissant, dans lequel on trouve un chef d’Etat et deux chefs de gouvernement européens ; des hommes et des femmes aux plus hauts échelons du pouvoir d’une ex-République soviétique ; des dizaines de députés de l’opposition d’un pays africain ; des princes et des princesses, des chefs d’entreprise, quelques milliardaires, des ambassadeurs, des généraux. Et puis, aussi et surtout, des centaines de journalistes, d’avocats, de militants des droits de l’homme.
Le Monde, associé au sein d’un consortium à seize autres rédactions, a eu accès à environ 50 000 numéros de téléphone – partagés par l’organisation Forbidden Stories et Amnesty International – de cibles potentielles d’un puissant logiciel espion de l’entreprise israélienne NSO Group, baptisé « Pegasus », pour le compte d’une dizaine de gouvernements. Il s’avère que nombre de ces cibles au sein de la société civile ont été effectivement infectées par Pegasus. Le Monde et le consortium coordonné par Forbidden Stories ont pu confirmer l’authenticité des données en les croisant avec plusieurs autres sources et en identifiant des dizaines de nouvelles victimes du logiciel par des analyses techniques extrêmement poussées sur leurs téléphones mobiles, grâce aux experts du Security Lab d’Amnesty International.
Violation des droits de l’homme Ces listes de « cibles » sont d’un intérêt exceptionnel : l’usage de Pegasus que font les Etats clients de NSO, en dehors de tout cadre légal, est un secret bien gardé. Depuis sa création, en 2011, l’entreprise israélienne vend son logiciel comme un outil décisif, destiné uniquement à la lutte contre le terrorisme et le crime organisé – et multiplie les discours assurant que tout est mis en œuvre pour garantir cet usage « légitime ». L’analyse des données consultées par Le Monde et ses partenaires montre que, pour une grande partie des clients de NSO, terrorisme et grand banditisme ne constituent qu’une infime partie des utilisations.
En Azerbaïdjan, au Maroc ou au Rwanda, ce sont avant tout des journalistes, des opposants, des avocats, des défenseurs des droits de l’homme qui sont les principales cibles de ce logiciel espion sophistiqué. NSO répète depuis des années que les cas de surveillance politique sont des incidents isolés. Les informations que Le Monde et ses partenaires publient, à partir du 18 juillet, dans une série de révélations programmées tout au long de la semaine, prouvent de manière incontestable que ces abus sont la norme et non l’exception.
Et oui, et c’est assez vieux ce genre d’histoires, où l’on fait faire le sale boulot par les services secrets « amis » afin de ne pas se faire avoir par ses propres lois ou législations.
La réalité est assez moche et complotiste, car il y a des histoires de très gros sous à protéger ou à cacher !
/fdata%2F0467561%2Favatar-blog-6315077-tmpphpjLCKfF.jpeg){kind=avatar}
/image%2F1562800%2F20210718%2Fob_e83ba9_larry-fink.png)
/image%2F1562800%2F20210718%2Fob_3a1569_great-reset.jpg)
/image%2F1562800%2F20210718%2Fob_508e22_front-cover-of-der-spiegel-33-1986-die.png)
naufrage/sauvetage 