German minister lied to advance career
RT | March 12, 2023
German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach claimed to have led a government-funded breast cancer research project when he applied for a professorship at the University of Tubingen in 1995, Die Welt reported on Sunday. However, the study never existed, according to the outlet.
Lauterbach was 32 years old at the time, and had just received a Doctor of Science degree from the Harvard School of Public Health. Back in Germany, he applied for the position in Tubingen, claiming that he was the head of a research project into breast cancer diagnostics and therapy at an oncology department in Aachen.
Lauterbach said that the project had received two million Deutschmarks (around $1.38 million at the time) from the German government, a portion of which he reportedly promised to transfer to the cash-strapped university if hired.
However, the government and the Aachen oncology center told Die Welt that the project – as described by Lauterbach – never existed. A similar cancer study did take place at Aachen, the paper noted, but Lauterbach was not listed as an author.
Lauterbach also claimed to have raised funding for a study at Princeton University in the US, which staff at the university deny, and to have received 20,000 Deutschmarks for a book project, which ultimately was never paid as he never finished the book.
The minister was offered the position at Tubingen, but turned it down in favor of a placement in Cologne. Questioned by Germany’s Merkur news outlet on Sunday, Lauterbach said that he “can no longer recall the specific case.”
According to Die Welt reporter Tim Rohn, Lauterbach turned down an invitation to speak to the newspaper.
Lies, Damned Lies, and Elephants
By Emanuel E. Garcia, M.D. | NewZealandDoc | March 9, 2023
You will forgive me if from time to time I find myself silent and stymied in the doldrums. The past three years, in our Corona Epoch, weigh heavily on us all, but there is more: these past three years have revealed to those with eyes to see and ears to hear the rank depths of corruption within virtually every institute of government and within virtually every formerly honorable profession.
To have witnessed Medicine undermine itself in such a way as to make itself unrecognizable – in, for example, its sudden enthusiasm for masks, it sudden forgetfulness about early treatment and natural immunity, its sudden acceptance of a novel therapeutic agent that had been inadequately tested, its mania to subject children to this agent, its sudden scorn for informed consent and its equally sudden disregard of the founding principle of the Hippocratic Oath, at first not to harm – is to recognize outright self-destruction. That so many so-called medical practitioners abandoned their fundamental duties to their patients and themselves is a disgrace for which I can find no adequate word except prostitution – bearing in mind that in using this word I am doing sex workers a disservice because their form of prostitution represents an honest exchange.
There is more to the weight of these three years of deception because these three years have carried the culminating weight of ages of hypocrisy, oppression and falsehood from the Powers that have ruled over the common man and woman.
A friend recently opined to me that he has begun to question the veracity of State utterances or, as is fashionable now to say, its ‘narratives’, and I responded by saying that I believed one should adopt the attitude that everything we are told by governmental authorities is a lie until proved otherwise.
They lied about the murders of JFK, RFK, MLK and Malcolm X. They lied about the war in Vietnam. They lied about 911. They lied about the Middle East invasions, the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, the various coups instigated by ‘intelligence’ agencies around the world and, naturally, they lied about covid in a way that would make Satan proud for the comprehensiveness and cleverness of the ruse. They are lying about the Ukraine and Russia at the moment too. The effect of these relentless and blatant falsehoods is to corrode the very tissue of legality and fairness that keeps societies together under an aegis of justice, and consequently to fashion a world whose only law is Power.
I’ve written about Power and its role and the sober expectations we must possess regarding those who wield it, yet the scale of sadistic and murderous campaigns throughout history pales in comparison to the war within which we find ourselves now: global, savage, ingeniously devious and, to date, fairly successful.
The ways and means of killing have assumed a sophistication that makes Nazi concentration camps appear cumbersome and inefficient. Is it not ‘cleaner’ and far more effective to render populations infertile, to accelerate cancers, to foster strokes and cardiomyopathy and autoimmune conditions in age groups hitherto unaccustomed to suffer such phenomena, and to create, even in these early years post-jab, what is euphemistically called ‘excess mortality’ – a term that sanitizes and obscures the calculated enfeeblement and killing that is unique and unprecedented?
And is it not a macabre form of genius to have persuaded so many many people to accept it all, to refute the evidence of their senses, and to attack those of us who challenge their perceptions with frightful vehemence, vehemence that overrides the bonds of friendship?
In a recent exchange with a friend of nearly five decades, I was told that he scorned my ‘alternative’ sources and that he was through with me. For the past year we had maintained our friendship – a friendship that included wonderful times together and frankly beautiful shared experiences – on condition that I not dare to speak about anything that contradicted his MSM conception of all things covid or Ukraine.
It was like sitting across from someone while the proverbial elephant in the room had placed its bulk right between us. We could exchange pleasantries and reminisce about anything and everything except the large creature with its imposing trunk and tusks and head and limbs that stood in our way, the immense pachyderm that was the bloated embodiment of historically accumulated falsehood.
Can friendships survive with such strictures?
Can friendships survive the chasm between those who have swallowed the propaganda of mainstream news outlets hook, line and sinker, and those who seek for truth from ordinary citizens not beholden to advertising revenue or governmental coercion?
Should friendships survive a chasm that separates those who condone mandates, lethal universal inoculations, outright kinetic war when it suits their purposes, climate change fanaticism, the suppression of debate, and a centralized global governing ‘order’ – from those who cherish free speech, individual responsibility, and human choice?
Well, however difficult and painful it may be to accept, there is a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing …
Dr. Garcia is a Philadelphia-born psychoanalyst and psychiatrist who emigrated to New Zealand in 2006. He has authored articles ranging from explorations of psychoanalytic technique, the psychology of creativity in music (Mahler, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Delius), and politics. He is also a poet, novelist and theatrical director. He retired from psychiatric practice in 2021 after working in the public sector in New Zealand.
The Covid Response Museum
By Bhaskaran Raman | Brownstone Institute | March 11, 2023
The world’s Covid response has been steeped in such absurdities and atrocities. Worse, there has thus far been little accountability for the human right violations. The sheer scale and planet-wide nature of the crimes needs to be recorded for posterity in various forms.
The idea that people’s fundamental birthrights can be taken away forcibly, in an ostensible attempt to “protect” them, belongs only in a museum. Indeed, it should have belonged only in fiction. Unfortunately, atrocities far worse than possible in fiction were committed worldwide, in the three years following the declaration of the Covid-19 pandemic.
“A 24-year-old MTech scholar at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in Bengaluru died by suicide, after he was depressed over allegedly having covid-like symptoms” ~ Aug 2020, Karnataka, India
The risk of Covid death, or even severe Covid, was always negligible for the young. Regardless of the risk, it shouldn’t have been a stigmatizing sin to catch an infectious respiratory virus.
“Unable to bear the mountain of debt due to closure of his salon, Manoj Zende ended his life”.~ Apr 2021, Maharashtra, India
What did lockdown achieve, except such needless misery for people whimsically labeled as “non-essential” for society? The US Vice President Kamala Harris posted a photo on Twitter, of herself with a child; the leader was unmasked, but the child’s smile was hidden behind a mask
~ Feb 2023, USA
A society which has lost the desire to see children’s faces is in deep disrepair.
“Schools Lost Track of Thousands of Students Who Left During Pandemic” ~ Feb 2023, Wall Street Journal
School closures in the name of Covid response were the largest peacetime rights violation in human history.
“23-year old Hitesh Kadve was pressured to take the Covid vaccine, due to the vaccine mandate for local train commute; he died within hours of taking the vaccine.” ~ Sep 2021, Maharashtra, India
Mandating an experimental medical product should be recorded in history as among the worst violations of medical ethics.
The Lockdown and Covid Response Museum is intended to be a documentation of the atrocities in the Covid-19 response, and the absurdities which were part and parcel of the atrocities.
The museum is intended to make people, especially the next generation, think and reflect, wonder and ponder how some unthinkable things came to be, laugh at some absurdities, feel sorry for some, cry in empathetic anguish at others. Most important of all, it is for them to resolve: “NEVER AGAIN.”
The Lockdown and Covid Response Museum is an initiative of the Universal Health Organisation (UHO), a group of epidemiologists, doctors, journalists, and other professionals. The UHO is based in India: a forum to ensure impartial, truthful, unbiased and relevant information on health reaches every citizen of the world to make informed choices pertaining to their health.
The target inauguration date for the museum is March 25, 2023, which is the third anniversary of mass incarceration of one-sixth of humanity, i.e. India’s first lockdown. To start, the museum will be online. We also encourage people to set up physical museums using the material from this website, under creative commons license: free to share with attribution.
For the museum, UHO invites story contributions from people around the world, who have suffered or seen others suffer due to the various extreme measures in the name of Covid-19 response. The museum will display submissions with only state/country information, and no personal identifying information (names will be anonymized).
The material in the museum will be under the “Creative Commons By Attribution” license : free to share with attribution. Possible submission types include: (1) image/photo, (2) video, (3) audio, (4) real-life story/account, (5) link to news report, (6) copy of government or other official (office/school/residential) rule/guideline. Submissions to the museum can be in one or more of the following categories: (1) lockdown, (2) Covid “containment” restrictions, (3) school closure, (4) other restrictions on children, (5) PCR/antigen testing: dirty unless proven clean, (6) Covid-19 vaccine mandate, (7) Covid-19 vaccine adverse event, (8) mask mandates, (9) virus avoidance extreme, (10) censorship, (11) police excess, etc.
To see sample entries in the museum, and to submit your entry, please visit.
Bhaskaran Raman is a faculty in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at IIT Bombay. Views expressed here are his personal opinion. He maintains the site: “Understand, Unclog, Unpanic, Unscare, Unlock (U5) India” https://tinyurl.com/u5india . He can be reached via twitter, telegram: @br_cse_iitb . br@cse.iitb.ac.in
The Deception Over Climate is Even Worse Than the Deception Over Covid
BY ANDREW MONTFORD | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | MARCH 11, 2023
In the aftermath of the release of the Lockdown Files, the public is slowly coming to terms with some fairly shocking facts: that the Government was willing to lie and mislead, and to scaremonger and manipulate the media, in order to achieve its Covid policy objectives (or even just to garner a few headlines). The news is still sinking in, but a day of reckoning for those involved looks likely.
For those of us bearing the scars of long engagement in the climate and energy wars, however, none of this was a surprise. It has long been clear that the inhabitants of the Westminster village were happy to hype up fears of climate purgatory and to fib about the road to redemption – renewables – and the cost of taking it. Once the public understand the depth and extent of the deception, and the damage done to the economy and the prospects for our children, the trickery over Covid is going to look decidedly peripheral.
The latest report from the Climate Change Committee (CCC) is a case in point. On the surface it’s a roadmap to a decarbonised electricity grid, but in reality it’s merely a sales document, full of tricks, evasions and outright falsehoods that would make even the most cynical used car salesman blush.
For example, in a number of places, it says that decarbonisation of the grid will be ‘cost-effective’, but you will find next to no information on what it will cost. The game that is being played becomes a bit clearer when you read the reference to ‘carbon prices’. In normal usage, the carbon price is the estimate of the damage done by a ton of carbon dioxide, but in the CCC’s parlance it is an estimate of what it will cost to decarbonise. So, while it gives you the impression it has done a cost-benefit analysis and is going to be saving you money, in reality it is only saying that the bill to be paid will be the same as previously advised. It’s a trick.
Another trick is to assume that wind power costs will be only a quarter of what they actually are. For years, the industry has been pushing claims that they have brought about a cost-reduction revolution. The problem is that windfarms’ own financial accounts show that it isn’t true. And with new windfarms now saying they will not come on stream without further subsidies, the deception has been exposed.
I’m picking on the CCC here, simply because it is in the news today. But it’s not just the CCC. None of the bodies whom the public expect to tell the truth about the Net Zero project will do so: the Royal Academy of Engineering is silent. The Royal Society likewise. National Grid pretends the task is a cinch. The National Infrastructure Commission just repeats the Government line verbatim. Parliament asks how soon the job can be done, not whether it can be done or how much it will cost. Everywhere the tricks go unchallenged and the lies are swept under the carpet.
Such deceptions mean that we are storing up catastrophic harms for our economy, and for our children and grandchildren. Energy that was said to be as cheap as gas is actually going to cost three or four times as much. The costs of ensuring supply when the wind doesn’t blow are an order of magnitude larger.
And whether it was delivered on the back of a lie or not, you are going to have to pay for it. A huge pipeline of wind projects is in place already, each eligible for an astonishing array of hidden subsidies – the list is too long to give here. Once built, they will suck wealth from our economy and hope from our society. They will be hard, if not impossible, to close down – they have been made exempt from windfall taxes and the Government cannot simply switch them off without destroying investor confidence in the economy as a whole. If we do not reverse course soon, our children will never know the wealth we have enjoyed until now, just poverty and rationing and hardship. And all because everyone is too scared to challenge the lies. Just like Covid.
‘Almost Like You Want to Find Nothing’: Experts Slam Norfolk Southern ‘Air Tests’ in East Palestine
By Wyatt Reed – Sputnik – 12.03.2023
Public health experts are warning that the ‘air testing’ being carried out in East Palestine by a for-profit company hired by Norfolk Southern is “almost like smoke and mirrors.”
The ‘air testing’ recently conducted in East Palestine residents’ homes was deficient in a number of key ways and was actually carried out by a company contracted by the rail company Norfolk Southern, a new report has revealed.
East Palestine, Ohio was smothered in toxic fumes last month when the authorities intentionally burned off huge quantities of vinyl chloride following a train derailment in the village.
Residents fled the area in the immediate aftermath. However, after an evacuation order was lifted, many have returned, with some reportedly citing ‘air testing’ results which apparently determined that they could return home without danger.
But on Saturday, an explosive new report seemed to confirm what many have come to suspect: “the air testing results did not prove their homes were truly safe.”
According to a major British outlet, “the air tests were inadequate in two ways: they were not designed to detect the full range of dangerous chemicals the derailment may have unleashed, and they did not sample the air long enough to accurately capture the levels of chemicals they were testing for.”
As University of Kentucky environmental health professor Erin Haynes reportedly put it, “it’s almost like if you want to find nothing, you run in and run out.”
Making matters even worse, “CTEH, the contractor that provided them, was hired by Norfolk Southern, the operator of the freight train that derailed,” the report detailed.
As another outlet previously explained, “the Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health (CTEH) has a name that might sound like a state or federal agency, but in reality it is a private, for-profit corporation that has been present after hundreds of ecological disasters—from 9/11 to Hurricane Katrina to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to COVID-19.”
While the relevant section has since been deleted, the company previously explained on its website how the data it’s collecting now could be weaponized against the victims of the Norfolk Southern train derailment disaster in East Palestine:
“A carrier of chemicals may be subjected to legal claims as a result of a real or imagined release,” CTEH noted, adding, “should this happen, appropriate meteorological and chemical data, recorded and saved… may be presented as powerful evidence to assist in the litigation or potentially preclude litigation.”
But despite its alarming track record and apparent desire to go after those affected by the crisis, the company remains a major force in the campaign to assuage locals’ health fears.
“It was CTEH, not the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), that designed the testing protocol for the indoor air tests,” explains the British report, adding, “and it is CTEH, not the government, that runs the hotline residents are directed to call with concerns about odors, fumes or health problems.”
In a recently-published video, the controversial company insists that their ‘testing’ shows there’s no danger to East Palestine residents.
“All of our air monitoring and sampling data collectively do not indicate any short- or long-term risks,” a CTEH toxicologist claimed.
But CTEH’s failure to register so-called volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in its tests doesn’t necessarily mean that people’s homes are actually safe, a number of experts noted. As Haynes reportedly explained, “VOCs are not the only chemicals that could have been in the air.”
And even a week after the derailment, she said it’s likely the compounds would have dissipated already.
“To keep the focus on the air is almost smoke and mirrors,” Haynes added. “Like, ‘Hey, the air is fine!’ Of course it’s going to be fine. Now you should be looking for where those chemicals went. They did not disappear. They are still in the environment.”
Healthcare worker deaths from COVID-19 vaccines will be covered up
The tragic case of a 31 year old New Zealand nurse who died 4 days after her COVID-19 booster shot
By Dr. William Makis MD | COVID Intel | March 11, 2023
Doctor and nurse deaths from COVID-19 vaccines were always going to be the focus of cover-ups. The reason is practical: the state needs doctors and nurses to enthusiastically push COVID-19 vaccines on their patients, and it needs these same doctors and nurses to stay silent about COVID-19 vaccine injuries and deaths.
Doctors and nurses mustn’t know that their colleagues are dying suddenly from the same COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that they are pushing daily on their own patients.
Image source: (credit to @Storiesofinjury)
31 year old NZ nurse died 4 days after booster shot
Divya Simon, 31, a rest home nurse, had her third COVID-19 booster vaccination four days before suffering a massive heart attack, according to a decision from coroner Luella Dunn released today. (click here)
“She had the booster on January 25 last year, and took the next day off work because she felt unwell. She complained of pain in the left side of her neck and shoulder.
Simon, who had two children aged 4 and 2, worked a night shift on January 28 returning home early the next morning and went to sleep at 10am. After she woke mid-afternoon she went to have a shower and told her husband she felt dizzy and had chest pains. That evening she had a cardiac arrest.
Ambulance arrived and Simon was given adrenalin, shocked and taken to Waikato Hospital. There she was intubated and taken to ICU but was not responsive and continued to deteriorate, dying the next day at 11am.
Dunn said an angiogram was unable to determine the cause of the cardiac arrest and there were no medical records to indicate why Simon would suffer a heart attack.
The pathologist who conducted her autopsy told the coroner Simon’s death was most likely related to an underlying weakness in her coronary arteries.
The pathologist found no evidence to suggest Simon’s vaccination contributed in any way to her death and the Centre for Adverse Reaction Monitoring came to the same conclusion.”
That’s it. Case closed. A healthy 31 year old nurse had a massive heart attack 4 days after her COVID-19 booster shot and it was definitely not the booster shot, although the pathologist had no idea why she died.
New Zealand does not perform autopsies with immunohistochemical staining of tissue samples for the COVID-19 vaccine spike protein.
So when the pathologist said he “didn’t find evidence” of COVID-19 vaccine damage, that was a lie. He “didn’t find evidence” because he didn’t look for it – he did not conduct the proper staining of the pathology samples, because no one in New Zealand does.
“There is no current test (in New Zealand) that will show the Covid-19 vaccine in the heart tissue” as reported by One News New Zealand (click here)
Let’s look at a different case where the pathologist linked a sudden death to the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine – the case of 26 year old NZ man Rory Nairn (click here)
Rory Nairn died of myocarditis after 1st dose of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
Coroner Sue Johnson opened an inquiry into his death. After hearing evidence from pathologist Dr Noelyn Hung, Johnson said she is satisfied that the COVID-19 vaccine caused the myocarditis from which Nairn died.
Hung carried out an intensive pathological examination of the heart. She stated that the cause of the myocarditis came down to a diagnosis by exclusion.
There is no current test that will show the Covid-19 vaccine in the heart tissue, but Hung was able to exclude other causes of myocarditis. Hung also excluded all other known potential causes including certain medicines.
There was no sign of any infection or any other reason for Nairn’s death except in the myocardium (the middle muscular layer of the heart). Johnson accepted Hung’s medical opinion that the direct cause of Nairn’s death was acute myocarditis – consistent with vaccine-related myocarditis.
If there is no test available to check for COVID-19 vaccine injury to body tissues, you cannot exclude the vaccine as the cause of death. In the case of the 31 year old nurse Divya Simon, the pathologist cannot conclude “the COVID-19 vaccine didn’t do this” or “there is no evidence the COVID-19 vaccine did this”. It is not possible to come to this conclusion, because the pathologist had no way of proving this.
In the case of 26 year old Rory Nairn, COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis was declared the cause of death because every other possibility was excluded. It was the diagnosis of exclusion.
Notice the difference?
The 31 year old nurse death was a cover-up. The pathologist lied. New Zealand’s Centre for Adverse Reaction Monitoring lied. They covered-up her death. Almost certainly because she was a nurse.
It should not surprise anyone by this point, that deaths of doctors and nurses will be treated very differently and will be covered up at all costs.
When 3 Canadian doctors died within days of each other in the same Trillium Health Hospital in Mississauga, Ontario, days after the rollout of the 4th COVID-19 vaccine (2nd booster shot), mainstream media called it a coincidence (click here) (click here)
That’s why my reporting on 132 Canadian doctor sudden deaths since the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines has been so “controversial”.
The fiercest attacks I have faced from mainstream media so far, were about me exposing the sudden deaths of fully COVID-19 vaccinated Canadian doctors.
I was attacked by Global news (click here), Toronto Star (click here), Reuters (click here), AAP (click here), Politifact (click here), Logically (click here), Lead Stories (click here).
So whenever you see a case like this where a coroner or pathologist declares that “COVID-19 vaccine didn’t cause this death”, you will know they are lying, and you will be able to explain exactly why they are lying.
They can allow the occasional citizen’s death to be linked to the COVID-19 vaccine. But they cannot and will not allow a doctor or nurse’s death to be linked to the vaccine.
US House Passes Bill Prohibiting Government Workers From Censoring Speech in Official Role
Sputnik – 10.03.2023
WASHINGTON – The US House of Representatives passed a bill to prevent federal government employees from censoring speech in their official capacity, amid hearings by congressional committees on the collusion between tech companies and the government to “moderate” content online.
House lawmakers passed the Protecting Speech From Government Interference Act along partisan lines on Thursday in a vote of 219-206.
The bill prohibits employees of executive agencies or those otherwise in the competitive service from using their official authority to influence or advocate for a third party, including private entities, to censor speech.
“Government agencies such as the FBI and the State Department have been working behind-the-scenes with Big Tech to silence American citizens expressing conservative views online,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in a statement on the bill. “Americans have the right to express themselves lawfully online without the government controlling the narrative.”
Earlier on Thursday, a House select subcommittee held a hearing with authors of the so-called Twitter Files to hear testimony on the collusion between Big Tech, government agencies and private organizations – dubbed the Censorship-Industrial Complex – to moderate, suppress and censor online content.
The Twitter Files have revealed how the US government collaborated with Big Tech companies such as Twitter to suppress information related to COVID-19 and the Hunter Biden laptop story, among others.
Aspen Institute’s Censorship Commission
Katie Couric, Prince Harry, et al. recommended restrictions on free speech
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | March 10, 2023
Matt Taibbi continues his Twitter reporting on what he calls the CENSORSHIP-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. His report yesterday on the Aspen Institute’s activities caught my eye. As he put it:
14. The Woodstock of the Censorship-Industrial Complex came when the Aspen Institute – which receives millions a year from both the State Department and USAID – held a star-studded confab in Aspen in August 2021 to release its final report on “Information Disorder.”
15. The report was co-authored by Katie Couric and Chris Krebs, the founder of the DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Yoel Roth of Twitter and Nathaniel Gleicher of Facebook were technical advisors. Prince Harry joined Couric as a Commissioner.
16. Their taxpayer-backed conclusions: the state should have total access to data to make searching speech easier, speech offenders should be put in a “holding area,” and government should probably restrict disinformation, “even if it means losing some freedom.”
In other words, a group of extremely wealthy, privileged, half-educated, self-important people assemble in North America’s swankiest mountain retreat, at an institution heavily financed by taxpayer money, to discuss censoring and correcting the plebs’ “information disorder.” A naive outsider might wonder if this sort of activity was conceived as an intentional insult of the middle class, taxpaying citizenry.
The mental habits of the participants are perhaps best expressed by their choice of Prince Harry—a descendent of King George III, who once publicly characterized the U.S. First Amendment protection of free speech as “bonkers”—as a Commissioner. How strange that a young man who seems unable to manage his personal and family affairs was commissioned with making recommendations to U.S. policymakers about governing the American people.
Matt Taibbi’s Twitter reporting on censorship is very interesting and illuminating.
What Would Happen If American Elites Told the Truth?
By Will Blakely | Mises Wire | March 8, 2023
What if America’s elite told the truth?
It seems a ridiculous question to ask. It’s obvious to most of us here that our politicians, bureaucratic managers, and state-associated business leaders hardly ever tell the truth. What use is it for us to ask, “What if?”
There seems to be a considerable amount of social pressure urging us to abandon our better judgment, not for the sake of reason, but for cooperation. If we don’t, the uncritical mob will label us “conspiracy theorists,” placing us in a box with schizophrenics in tinfoil hats who babble on about aliens and flat earth.
Any mature person notices the obvious discrepancy between what we see with our own eyes and what our country’s elites tell us.
When covid-19 hit, we knew from the beginning that “fifteen days to slow the spread” was fraudulent, yet the masses blindly expected us to give our leaders the benefit of the doubt. When the feds churned out as much as 80 percent of the money supply in a matter of two years and they said inflation was merely “transitory,” we again knew better yet were expected to remain silent.
Sure, we might not always know exactly what the truth is, but we can generally get an idea about what it isn’t. Something is telling us that the truth is not what the people in charge say it is.
The proper thing to do is to accept what we can’t know and home in upon what we do. We should take what our public officials do and say and ask ourselves, “How does this compare to what they would say and do if they were telling the truth?” By performing this thought experiment, we can be sure our skepticism is well guided.
When we ask ourselves this question, let’s place ourselves in the shoes of the elite: our legislatures, judges, executives, and bureaucrats, particularly those on the federal level. Let’s also consider the state-sponsored business leaders, the spokespeople of the corporate press, and established celebrities.
Let’s assume (against our strongest inclinations) we are incorrect in thinking what they tell us is dishonest. We can even take at face value that they are acting in good faith in everything they say and do, intending wholeheartedly to be completely honest both in their words and their actions.
What would they say and what would they do?
They Would Be Transparent
First of all, an honest elite would be completely transparent, and they certainly wouldn’t silence their opponents. Why hide something if there is nothing to hide? Wouldn’t an honest person be open to an honest investigation? If being transparent provided an answer to us pesky skeptics, what would be the cost?
Yet, this is not what they do. The very leaders who claim to be the bastions of progress and virtue seem to keep plenty of secrets.
After over half a century of questions, President Biden continued to withhold documents about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Nearly every edition of the Twitter Files exposed how public officials intentionally colluded with a so-called private company to silence particular narratives, some of which turned out to be likely true, such as the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop and the lab-origin theory of covid-19. Moreover, the federal government is consistently predatory toward whistleblowers and investigative journalists like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange.
They Would Avoid Ambiguity
If they were honest, the elites would also speak as clearly as possible. Their PR professionals would advise them to avoid all ambiguity and maintain clear and simple language.
After all, the goal of honest communication is to deliver a message, not to obscure it. If a subject is complicated—such as that of economics, warfare, or virology—that is all the more reason to simplify it.
But we know the elites don’t do this either. Perhaps there’s a reason. In his great essay “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell explains how politicians can use meaningless words to cover up their real actions and intentions. As an example, he cites the use of the word “democracy”:
In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way.
This sounds familiar to us. It wasn’t so long ago when scripted corporate news anchors around the country repeated “this is extremely dangerous to our democracy” to warn us about what they deemed to be “disinformation.”
How many times have we heard other meaningless buzzwords—“unity,” “equality,” “equity,” and even “patriotism”—repeated time and time again as justifications for things like war, taxation, and mass surveillance?
They Would Admit Their Mistakes
Though this experiment requires us to assume that our elites are never ill willed or intentionally incorrect, we don’t have to assume they’re always right. We can and should explore how they deal with honest mistakes.
Of course, an honest person admits he’s wrong when he makes a mistake. He would never ask other people to accept a contradiction by forcing them to pretend like a mistake was never made, like the draconian Ingsoc regime does to Winston Smith in the book 1984, another one of Orwell’s great works.
When have the public officials who botched their response to covid-19 apologized for being wrong about “gain-of-function” research or suggesting that the covid-19 vaccines would prevent the spread of the disease? Did Bush or Cheney ever apologize for completely missing the mark about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
Limitations
There certainly are limitations to our experiment. Our public officials could act irrationally. They could, at heart, be good, good people but act out of fear of being falsely discredited.
But shouldn’t we want leaders with some degree of fortitude? Either way, it seems they are in the wrong and it seems we’re in the right to take what they say with a grain of salt.
The elite could also simply believe that society isn’t intelligent enough to handle the truth, which, though perhaps false, isn’t such an unreasonable opinion. After all, a large part of our society is stupid enough to believe everything they say.
However, many of us are catching on. Plenty know they are being misled but care more to avoid conflict than to point out the discrepancies. The truth is good in its own right. Justice can’t be rooted in falsehood.
We know that our nation’s elites aren’t acting like people who are both honest and rational. Therefore, it’s safe to say that our public officials are either dishonest, irrational, or both. Regardless, they shouldn’t be blindly trusted, and anyone who tells us we are delusional for thinking so is wrong.
Out of respect for the truth, we ought to think critically about what our elites say and do, and we shouldn’t feel guilty at all for doing so.
Will Blakely is a Christian, Southerner and a journalist.
Featured Video
Weaponized Journalism: 2021 Sayer Ji Interview with NPR
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
How Rothschild Banking Clan Uses Its Vast Wealth to Influence World Events and Control Governments
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 15.09.2024
How powerful is the Rothschild banking family? How did they amass their fortune? Just how rich are they? Do they secretly control the world? Sputnik explores. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Dockworkers launch global strike against Israeli and US military shipments
- Europe facing gas price shock – Gazprom chief
- Ukraine continues recruiting people with disabilities
- Weaponized Journalism: 2021 Sayer Ji Interview with NPR
- Beyond Netanyahu: what Israel’s election means for Palestinians
- Lithuania plans universal conscription
- Lies, Damn Lies, and Ukraine News
- Financial Times rejects Nordic demands to correct Putin call story – media
- The Case for Less Unity in Europe
- Ukraine expands minority rights under EU pressure – but Russians remain excluded
- If Americans Knew
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- Germany’s Green Energy Transition Becoming Increasingly Expensive…Another 6 Trillion Euros!
- Sudden Stratospheric Warming, Powerful El Niño Combination May Lead To Extreme Europe Cold, Energy Crisis!
- Two New Studies Find Thwaites Glacier Melt Cannot Be Driven By Human Activity Or A Warming Ocean
- E-Cars Reduce CO2 Emissions By Only 41% Compared To Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles
- Predictions Made By Renowned Climate Professor Over Past Decades Have Been Proven To Be Poor
- New Study Suggests Large Regions Of The Pacific Ocean Have Been Cooling For The Last 80 Years
- Germany’s Green Energy Debacle: High Energy Costs Force Kahla Porzellan to Close After 182 Years!
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
