Why are so Many Californians Dying?
By Thomas Buckley | Brownstone Institute | January 3, 2024
Covid has claimed about 105,000* lives in the state since 2020.
In that same time period, 82,000 more Californians died from everything else than is typical.
Adjusted for the decline in population, that non-Covid “excess death” figure becomes even more concerning as the state has seen its population drop to about the same it was in 2015.
In 2015 – obviously there was no Covid – 260,000 of the then 39 million Californians died. In 2023, not including November and December, 240,000 people died not from Covid (6,000 additional people died of Covid.).
Extrapolating the year-to-date figures for 2023 creates a final year-end figure of 280,000 – 20,000 more people than died in 2015. That’s a non-Covid, population-neutral jump of 8%.
In other words, despite the protestations of certain officials, the state’s death rate has NOT returned to “pre-Covid” levels – in 2019 the year before the pandemic, 270,000 people died with a population at least 400,000 greater than today.
Why?
Dr. Bob Wachter, medical chair at UC-SF and ardent supporter of tight pandemic restrictions, did not respond to an email from the Globe (away for work the auto-response said) but he did recently tell the San Jose Mercury News that in “(T)he last three years, not only were there a lot of deaths from Covid, there were a lot of additional deaths from non-Covid causes, which are probably attributable to people not receiving the medical care that they normally would have received’ when ERs were overflowing with Covid patients (note – the truth of that ER assertion has not been verified), Wachter noted.”
In other words, the pandemicist Wachter admitted the pandemic response itself at least contributed to a significant number of excess deaths, a fact that was aggressively and roundly denied and – if mentioned – led to censoring and societal ostracization (and in many cases job losses) by the powers that be during the pandemic.
A second admission along these lines was recently made by former National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins – Tony Fauci’s boss.
In this video clip, Collins – who once called for a “devastating takedown” (see above) of those who questioned the hard pandemic response – said his DC and public health blinders, well, blinded him to the problems his pandemic response caused and is still causing:
If you’re a public health person, and you’re trying to make a decision, you have this very narrow view of what the right decision is, and that is something that will save a life. Doesn’t matter what else happens, so you attach infinite value to stopping the disease and saving a life. You attach zero value to whether this actually totally disrupts people’s lives, ruins the economy, and has many kids kept out of school in a way that they never might quite recover from. Collateral damage. This is a public health mindset. And I think a lot of us involved in trying to make those recommendations had that mindset — and that was really unfortunate, it’s another mistake we made.
(You can see Collins for yourself here.)
Needless to say there is not even a half-hearted apology involved. And Collins is/was wrong in the approach to public health he apparently subscribes to, as throughout modern history it has involved a cost/benefit analysis and a weighing of the impact on society.
Public health, practiced properly, does not – and never before has – attached “zero value to whether this actually totally disrupts people’s lives, ruins the economy, and has many kids kept out of school in a way that they never might quite recover from.”
“We had the exact wrong people in charge at the exact wrong time,” said Stanford professor of medicine (and one of the people Collins tried to “take down”) Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. “Their decisions were myopically deadly.”
To remind Collins of the ramifications of his decision beyond the excess deaths:
Massive educational degradation. Economic devastation, by both the lockdowns and now the continuing fiscal nightmare plaguing the nation caused by continuing federal overreaction. The critical damage to the development of children’s social skills through hyper-masking and fear-mongering. The obliteration of the public’s trust in institutions due to their incompetence and deceitfulness during the pandemic. The massive erosion of civil liberties. The direct hardships caused by vaccination mandates, etc. under the false claim of helping one’s neighbor. The explosion of the growth of Wall Street built on the destruction of Main Street.
The clear separation of society into two camps – those who could easily prosper during the pandemic and those whose lives were completely upended. The demonization of anyone daring to ask even basic questions about the efficacy of the response, be it the vaccines themselves, the closure of public schools, the origin of the virus, or the absurdity of the useless public theater that made up much of the program. The fissures created throughout society and the harm caused by guillotined relationships amongst family and friends.
The slanders and career chaos endured by prominent actual experts (see the Great Barrington Declaration, co-authored by Bhattacharya) and just plain reasonable people like Jennifer Sey for daring to offer different approaches; approaches – such as focusing on the most vulnerable – that had been tested and succeeded before.
Nationally, pandemic “all-cause” deaths spiked, for obvious reasons, but they remain stubbornly higher than normal to this day.
There could be mitigating factors to California’s numbers, specifically the issue of drug overdoses. Since 2018, the overdose death rate has doubled. The last overall figures available are from 2021 which showed 10,901 people dying of an overdose. While not specifically broken out for which drug, the vast majority are from opioid overdoses and the vast majority of those involve fentanyl. In 2022, there were 7,385 opioid-related deaths with 6,473 of those involving fentanyl.
But the overdose death increase would account for only about 25% of the total increase in “excess deaths,” meaning it has an impact but cannot explain the whole story.
There is also the issue of homeless deaths. Homeless people die at a far higher rate than the rest of the population and California has had a burgeoning homeless population for the last few years, despite the money being spent on the issue. However, at least a portion of that increase can – as with overdoses – be attributed to fentanyl and is therefore difficult to separate out as discrete numbers.
Those two increases, however, may explain the fact that the “all-cause” excess death rate for those in the 25-to-44 year age bracket (it has comparatively higher overdose death and homelessness figures) have remained – except for two very recent weeks – above the typical historical range.
The increase in overdose (and alcohol-related deaths) has been directly tied to the pandemic response previously. In California, there were about 3,500 more alcohol-related deaths during the pandemic response than before: 5,600 in 2019 (pre-pandemic,) 6,100 in 2020, 7,100 in 2021, 6,600 in 2022, and 2023 is on pace to see about 6,000.
That still leaves roughly half of the excess deaths unaccounted for, raising questions about the safety of the Covid shot (a shot, not a vaccine) itself. The CDC lists 640 deaths in California directly from the shot and an increase in “adverse effects” from the shot compared to many other actual vaccines. The Covid shot “ adverse” rate was one in a thousand, while, for comparison, it’s about one in a million for the polio vaccine.
That means a person was more than 9 times as likely to die from the Covid shot as any other vaccine and 6.5 times to be injured by it in some fashion.
Still that is – according to state figures – not enough to explain the increase.
There are three other issues to note: first, many of the counting questions around dying “from” Covid versus “with” Covid remain, meaning the Covid death numbers could be elevated if the “withs” are lumped in with the “froms.”
Second, there is the simmering matter of “iatrogenic” deaths – i.e. deaths caused by the treatment. Early on in the pandemic response, a push was made to “ventilate” patients mechanically. From the above article (no caps in the original):
here’s an unsettling comparison: in NYC area, mortality rate for all COV ICU patients was 78%. in stockholm, the SURVIVAL rate was over 80%. this is a staggering variance. the key difference: ventilators. NYC used them on 85% of patients, sweden used them sparingly
Combined with the placing of Covid patients in nursing homes, the number of actual “only” or “natural” (for lack of a better term) Covid deaths, again, may be elevated.
The state Department of Public Health declined to comment on the matter.
Which brings us back to the Wachter and Collins oblique, nearly accidental admissions that the response itself may have caused significant and ongoing damage across numerous personal and public sectors.
Comparing California to other states also shows a concerning trend, specifically when considering the aftermath of the pandemic response. While increasing in population, for example, Florida’s excess death rate increase was/is lower than California’s as was its Covid death rate, a fact Gov. Gavin Newsom has been lying about for years.
During the pandemic itself, the nation saw an “all-cause” – including Covid – death rate increase of about 16% above normal. Using that metric, as it is clear the response itself had knock-on effects – California’s was 19.4% and Florida’s was 16.7%, despite the wildly different pandemic responses.
Imagine, if you will, you own a baseball team and you have two shortstops, one that earns $10 million a year and one that earns $1 million. And it turns out that both are equally talented – errors, batting stats, etc. – and that maybe the cheaper one is actually even a bit more talented it turns out. Which shortstop was the better deal for the team? The less expensive one, of course.
That is an apt analogy for states choosing how to respond to the pandemic – Florida cut the $10 million player while California kept him. In other words, the two states got the same-ish performance but at wildly different societal costs.
This pattern seems to be borne out by many of the figures. Obviously, various states that ended up lower than the national average took very different approaches: North Dakota and New Jersey saw roughly the same all-cause mortality numbers, as did Washington (state) and South Dakota.
This is true on the “high side” as well: California and Montana, Oregon and Arkansas are two pairs that had similar numbers with different approaches.
All of this raises a deeper question in that there appears to be little if any direct causative resultant difference between a draconian pandemic response and a softer touch.
And that should not at all be the case: the lockdowns, the masks, the shots, the social distancing, the closing of schools and stores and churches and parks, and everything else should have produced a clear and distinct difference – if the pandemicists were right.
If they were right, the difference in results should be stark and obvious to the naked eye. Miami should look like Genoa after the plague ships arrived while Los Angeles should seem like a New Eden. If the much-maligned Swedish “soft” model was as dangerous as the pandemicists said, Stockholm should be a ghost town.
But that’s not at all true and that’s why the pandemicists are/were so evidently wrong: the harshest methods had little impact on the end results.
While there were differences between states, they cannot necessarily be directly tied to a specific policy construct (save Hawaii, which can be discounted considering their isolated geography). Hard or soft pandemic response, in the long run it didn’t seem to matter much in the Covid death tolls.
Where it did – and still does – matter is the immediate and long-lasting damage the more tyrannical responses had on society as a whole.
And – if California’s excess death numbers are an indicator – the pandemic response itself is still killing people.
And that, too, definitely shouldn’t be happening – if the pandemicists were right.
It is even more problematic – and even more ethically abhorrent – if the Covid death figures are inflated; the number of Covid deaths of 105,000 is only about 20% higher than the other non-Covid excess death figure of 82,000.
In other words, the net “from Covid” deaths may not be terribly different from the “from the Covid response” death count.
And that possibility is the most terrifying of all.
* All numbers used are rounded for simplicity and come from state and federal sources.
Thomas Buckley is the former mayor of Lake Elsinore, Cal. and a former newspaper reporter. He is currently the operator of a small communications and planning consultancy.
They Think We Are Stupid, Volume 4
By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | January 2, 2024
Happy New Year, dear readers! As always, this series of headlines is presented without commentary. It’s everything you need to know about our ruling class’s opinion of you.
Expansion of UK Investigatory Law to Force Tech Companies Into ‘Surveillance State’
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 03.01.2024
King Charles III announced No.10’s decision to expand the powers of the 2016 Investigatory Powers Act last year, adding that threats to national security are currently “changing rapidly due to new technology.”
The UK government’s drive to update the country’s controversial Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) is prompting “a fresh outcry” among both industry execs and privacy campaigners, a US news outlet has reported.
According to the outlet, Downing Street’s actions to expand what is known as one of Europe’s toughest surveillance laws could hobble efforts to protect user privacy.
In a letter to Home Secretary James Cleverly, industry body TechUK warned that the Investigatory Powers (Amendment) Bill threatens technological innovation, undermines the sovereignty of other nations and leads to far-reaching consequences if it causes a domino effect overseas.
TechUK insisted that combined with pre-existing powers, the IPA changes would “grant a de- facto power to indefinitely veto companies from making changes to their products and services offered in the UK.”
“We stress the critical need for adequate time to thoroughly discuss these changes, highlighting that rigorous scrutiny is essential given the international precedent they will set and their very serious impacts,” the letter reads.
The document points out that TechUK is concerned that the the proposed changes are presented by the Home Office as minor adjustments and as such are being downplayed.
Director of thecampaign group Big Brother Watch, Silkie Carlo, argued that with CCTV footage or social media posts people may not have an expectation of privacy, but that “data taken together and processed in a certain way, can be incredibly intrusive.”
“What we’re seeing across these different bills is a continual edging further towards […] turning private tech companies into arms of a surveillance state,” Carlo said.
A No.10 spokesperson in turn underscored that the government has always been clear that it supports technological innovation as well as private and secure communications technologies, including end-to-end encryption. “But this cannot come at a cost to public safety, and it is critical that decisions are taken by those with democratic accountability,” the spokesperson warned.
On June 5, the Home Office opened consultations to discuss “possible outcomes for revised IPA notices…intended to improve the effectiveness of the current regimes” amid new challenges to national security.
The Home Office in particular wants companies offering messaging services, including Apple behind FaceTime and iMessage, and Meta behind WhatsApp, to seek government approval around these messaging tools’ security features.
The 2016 IPA, commonly known as the “snoopers’ charter”, contains a spate of provisions, such as requiring broadband internet service providers and mobile operators to log internet connection records (ICRs) for up to 12 months.
Ukrainians Turn Against War But Are Afraid to Speak Out
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | January 2, 2024
As the war in Ukraine nears the end of its second year, Ukrainians are turning against fighting and towards diplomacy. One former official said that Ukrainian soldiers are currently fighting and dying for nothing.
The Times reports, “Many Ukrainians are growing tired and weary of the war. One Ukrainian military source admitted that average Ukrainians were talking of a truce yet there were questions around what the price of the truce would be.”
Most people in Ukraine wanted a truce but were “afraid to admit it to themselves,” Mykhailo Chaplyha, a political commentator and former vice-ombudsman of Ukraine, said. There was an atmosphere of “total mistrust and fear” in Ukraine and anyone who dared to think of a truce would immediately become an “outcast and a traitor.”
After Russia invaded Ukraine, President Zelensky targeted dissidents using the security state. The Ukrainian media and Zelensky’s main political opposition has been outlawed. Kiev has targeted branches of the Orthodox church perceived to be too close to Moscow.
A former Ukrainian official said that Zelensky was losing support. He said the West told Kiev not to give up, but there was no war strategy and soldiers were “sent to the front line to die.” The official continued, “It is nonsense to send in our soldiers to die if we don’t have enough armament and resources to win militarily. What is the strategy, to keep us dying for what? And not less important — where is our diplomacy?”
In the early months of the war in Ukraine, the West pushed Kiev to abandon talks with Moscow. The US and its allies promised Ukraine that it would provide Kiev with all the support it needs to win the war.
However, as the war nears its third year, the Western weapons stockpiles are approaching depletion. The White House has run out of funds for arming Ukraine, while future aid is being used as leverage in an immigration debate.
Since October 7, the Biden administration has started to prioritize arming Israel over Ukraine. Israel has received tens of thousands of 155 mm shells, a high-demand weapon for both Kiev and Tel Aviv.
Germany: Anti-immigration AfD party polling at new high in Saxony, SPD hits historic low just 8 months before elections
By Denes Albert | Remix News | January 2, 2024
The eastern German state of Saxony is presenting new problems for the country’s political establishment, with new polling showing the Alternative for Germany (AfD) reaching a new record high, while the Social Democrats (SPD) would be entirely kicked out of state parliament.
The new poll from the research institute Civey showed the AfD at 37 percent of the vote, rising four points since the last poll four weeks ago. Meanwhile, the SPD would obtain an abysmal 3 percent of the vote. Five years ago, the party still achieved 7.7 percent.
If the left-wing SPD were to achieve such a result, it would mark the first time since the Second World War that the SPD failed to achieve the 5 percent threshold in a federal state, which means it would be entirely removed from parliament. Such a result would place new pressure on Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
The Christian Democrats (CDU) scored 32 percent, putting them in second place. The CDU, which currently governs the state with the SPD and Greens, would no longer be able to maintain its coalition. If the elections were held today, and the CDU party maintained its self-declared “firewall” against the AfD, it could then only govern with a coalition of the Left party and Greens.
Such a result would place extreme pressure on the CDU, as the party has also traditionally rejected any alliance with the Left Party.
Saxony will hold its elections in approximately eight months, on Sept. 1, 2024, and there are fears from the German political establishment that some eastern states will be ungovernable without including AfD in coalition governments.
In response to the popularity of the AfD, there are now ongoing attempts to ban the party outright, including efforts from CDU MP Marco Wanderwitz, who was defeated by an AfD candidate in his home district.
“We are dealing with a party that seriously endangers our free democratic basic order and the state as a whole,” which is why “it is high time to ban them,” said Wanderwitz during an appearance on ARD’s public television program last year.
Speaker on BBC Verify Correspondent’s Six Month Sabbatical Course Has Called for Jailing Climate Contrarians
BY CHRIS MORRISON | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JANUARY 1, 2024
Further and better particulars have emerged about the green billionaire-funded course run by the Oxford Climate Journalism Network (OCJN), which has to date attracted over 400 participants from around the world. It recently signed up Marco Silva, the climate ‘disinformation’ specialist employed by BBC Verify. To “hit closer to home”, course participants are told to pick a fruit such as a mango and discuss why it wasn’t as tasty as the year before due to the impact of climate change. Noted climate hysteric Saffron O’Neill has been a past speaker and she is on record as speculating on the need for “fines and imprisonment” for expressing scepticism about “well supported” science. There is something very disturbing about a climate activist from a State-reliant broadcaster attending a course funded by narrative-driven billionaires with a speaker who has suggested that sceptical climate scientists and writers be locked up in prison.
As the Daily Sceptic disclosed, the OCJN six-month course is run by the Reuters Institute, which is funded by the Thomson Reuters Foundation. Direct funding for the course, which started last year, has been provided by the Laudes Foundation and the European Climate Fund, the latter heavily supported by Extinction Rebellion funder Sir Christopher Hohn. Immersion in the correct political narrative surrounding climate collapse, the so-called ‘settled’ science, and the need for extreme Net Zero measures, whatever the cost, is the order of the day. It would appear that the aim of the OCJN is to insert constant fearmongering messages into media stories, as global elites press ahead with a collectivist Net Zero political agenda.
In a recently published essay, two OCJN organisers give chapter and verse as to how this is being directed on the course. It is designed to allow climate journalists to “move beyond their siloed past” into a strategic position within newsrooms “combining expertise with collaboration”. The “pick your mango” strategy is designed to make climate change “less abstract” and delegates are told to pick a “beloved fruit or activity that everyone in your country or region seems to care about, and seems to capture attention when impacted by climate change”.
“Less abstract” is one way of summing up this pseudoscientific hogwash. ‘Infantile’ might be better. None of it is based on a scintilla of scientific proof. Much the same can be said for a presentation by Dr. Friederike Otto who uses computer models to claim her green billionaire-funded World Weather Attribution (WWA) team can attribute individual bad weather events to human-caused climate change. Following Otto’s presentation, attendees are reported to have shown a “massive jump in self-confidence” when attributing individual weather to the long-term climate change.
The distinguished science writer Roger Pielke Jnr. is scathing about weather attribution calling it a new “cottage industry”, adding that the need to feed the climate beast leads to a knock-on effect of creating incentives for researchers to produce studies with links to climate – “no matter how tenuous or trivial”. At the BBC, weather attribution has always been very popular. Writing in a WWA guide for journalists, the former BBC Today editor Sarah Sands says attribution studies have given us “significant insight into the horseman of the climate apocalypse”. Former OCJN attendee, Ben Rich, the BBC’s lead weather presenter, has used the “science” of climate attribution “to help explain to audiences when and how scientists can link extreme weather to climate change”.
None of this ludicrous propaganda can be questioned since the science is deemed to be ‘settled’. Geography lecturer Dr. Saffron O’Neill has taken climate hysteria to a new level with a demand that journalists should not use photos of people enjoying themselves on beaches during summer heat waves. She recently told theGuardian that such images “can hold the same power” as photos of the tanks in Tiananmen Square and smoke billowing from the Twin Towers. After a session with O’Neill, audience members said that “news outlets and photo agencies can and should think ahead of time about how they photograph the risks of hot weather”. And of course if anyone disagrees with O’Neill and her version of the “well supported” science, it is time for fines and prison. The last suggestion was published in Carbon Brief, the activist blog financed by the European Climate Fund. As it happens, Carbon Brief is represented on the OCJN Advisory Board through its editor Leo Hickman.
The OCJN is far from the only billionaire foundation-funded operation trying to spread climate alarm and hysteria throughout the general population. Climate Central targets local media with ready-to-publish stories about significant landmarks disappearing beneath rising sea levels. It recently gulled the Mirror into running a notably silly story about much of London disappearing beneath the waves within 80 years. Covering Climate Now (CC Now) is an off-shoot of the Columbia Journalism Review and is backed by the Guardian. It claims to feed over 500 media operations with pre-written climate stories. Both these operations rely on heavy financial support from a small cluster of green billionaire funds.
The links between these operations spreads far and wide. One of the partners of CC Now is Reuters, the news agency connected to the OCJN through its Reuters Institute. Not everyone is happy with Reuters’ connections to operations such as CC Now that make no secret of a desire to promote a hard-line Net Zero narrative and suppress opposition to it. Neil Winton worked for 32 years at the agency covering science in his time. Politicians and lobbyists are in the process of dismantling our way of life, he notes. If we are going to give up our civilisation, at the very least we ought to have an open debate. “Journalists need to stand up and be counted. The trouble is this requires bravery and energy, and an urge to question conventional wisdom,” he said.
And, he might have added, avoiding the naughty step of Dr. Saffron O’Neill.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
The Last Time the 14th Amendment Insurrection Provision Was Used to Bar Someone from US Elected Office
By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | December 30, 2023
The effort by the Colorado Supreme Court and the Maine Secretary of State to, in their respective states, keep Trump off the presidential race ballot in the name of enforcing the “insurrection provision” of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution is an atrocious abuse of power. So too was the last time the provision was used as a reason to bar an individual from holding an elected office in the United States government.
A little over a hundred years ago, Victor Berger was twice barred from joining the US House of Representatives after winning election to that office. Why? Eric Boehm, tells the story in a Friday Reason article:
Berger was born in Austria and immigrated to the United States as a young man. In 1910, he won a seat in Congress representing Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and served a single two-year term. After being defeated in 1912, Berger remained active in left-wing politics and opposed America’s entry into the First World War. In 1918, he was convicted (along with several other Socialist organizers) of having violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which effectively criminalized any criticism of the war effort.
Officially, Berger was found guilty of 26 “disloyal acts” related to a series of editorials published by the Milwaukee Leader, a paper Berger helped run, arguing against America’s involvement in the war.
Despite that conviction—or perhaps because of it—Berger was elected to Congress again in 1918. His campaign called for the country to respect free speech and freedom of the press, and he continued to push for an “early, general, lasting and democratic peace.” (Naturally, he also campaigned for a variety of typically terrible Socialist ideas too, like the nationalization of industries.)
Here’s where Section 3 of the 14th Amendment popped up. Congress refused to seat Berger when he showed up to work in January 1919, on the grounds that his Espionage Act conviction was tantamount to engaging in insurrection against the country. The vote was nearly unanimous, 311-1, with the lone dissenting vote cast by a Wisconsin Republican.
A special election was held in December 1919 to fill the still-vacant seat, and Berger won again—this time earning even more votes than he had a year earlier. Again, a majority in Congress voted to block Berger from taking his seat.
After his conviction was then thrown out by the US Supreme Court due to his trial judge’s prejudice preventing a fair trial, Boehm relates that Berger was elected in 1922 to the US House and “seated without controversy” before being reelected in 1924 and 1926.
Read Boehm’s complete article here.
Notably, no court or state election official kept Berger from running for office. The only barrier came from the House that has a history of exercising a broader discretion over its membership. This broader discretion is suggested by Article I Section 5 provisions stating that the US House and US Senate shall each “be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its Own Members” and may, “with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.”
Adam Dick worked from 2003 through 2013 as a legislative aide for Rep. Ron Paul. Previously, he was a member of the Wisconsin State Board of Elections, a co-manager of Ed Thompson’s 2002 Wisconsin governor campaign, and a lawyer in New York and Connecticut.
20 years in the making: Daszak creates the narrative structure to move people off their land
Nathan Wolfe, Jonathan Epstein and others helped out in 2004.
BY MERYL NASS | DECEMBER 27, 2023
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1247383/pdf/ehp0112-001092.pdf
I just pulled out some of the high-sounding claptrap in this article, below, to give you its flavor. You can see how a small cadre of immoral ‘scientists’ funded by an evil cabal can create an “intellectual” infrastructure to justify stealing land in the name of pandemic prevention.
The (Formerly Law-Abiding) Citizen’s Guide to Navigating the US Prison System
BY RICHARD SOLOMON • UNZ REVIEW • DECEMBER 26, 2023
The owners shredded the Constitution. Legal protections, or even their simulation of a simulation, no longer exist. In Florida, questioning a historical event or the policies of a Middle East country risks ten years in prison. Taking selfies at a legal demonstration endorsed by a sitting President of the United States can get you almost twenty. A journalist and opinion writer became an international fugitive for insulting a Jewish woman online. Douglas Mackey (X/Twitter handle Ricky Vaughn) received a seven month federal prison sentence for posting a Hillary Clinton election meme. Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis pled guilty to one felony count of “aiding and abetting false statements and writings” after she wrote in a letter that the 2020 election was rigged. To avoid prison (she’ll still be a convicted felon and get disbarred), she agreed to testify against her co-defendants (who will likely receive prison time) in this bizarre “false statements/writings” racketeering case. Given the rapid rise in thought/speech crime incarceration, it behooves citizen-serfs, especially political ones, to gain some familiarity with the workings of the US prison industrial complex.
For the record, I’ve never been to prison. I’m disseminating data picked up from sources who have. If anyone reading this has done prison time or worked/works as a CO (corrections officer) and feels that I’ve misrepresented something, please add your perspective in the comments section. I don’t claim to be an expert on the penal system. Nor do I want to be.
Imagine you repost a meme on social media and get charged with “spreading misinformation while committing hate speech within a fifty-mile radius of an Israeli consulate and or synagogue during the commission of a thought crime.” Your day in court arrives, and after the #MeToo Jacinda Ardern lookalike prosecutor gives her PowerPoint presentation on your online browsing history and puts your bad-breakup ex-girlfriend on the stand, your case goes to a jury of monthly boosted blue and yellow flag emoji patriots. Following an hour of deliberation they return a guilty verdict. (They voted guilty within the first minute, but for appearance’s sake wait an hour before notifying the bailiff). After the Kamala Harris wannabe judge reads a moving passage from Michelle Obama’s “The Light We Carry” and tells you what a degenerate scumbag you are, she sentences you to ten years. What kind of life awaits you inside the prison industrial complex? Prison conditions vary depending on security level, location, and whether it’s a state or federal facility. While low-level fed camps offer the best conditions, high-level federal institutions like USP Atlanta and Beaumont are super barbaric. Alabama and Florida state prisons have bad reputations. Generally speaking, the higher the security level, the more brutal the prison. That’s not to say you can’t get jammed up in a minimum security facility or county jail.
Prison is violent. An angry lifer has little to lose by smashing or stabbing a prisoner he dislikes. “What are you looking at?” can be a tricky question to answer in the civilian world. Much more so in prison.
Even if you’re an astute practitioner of conflict avoidance, in higher-level prisons you will likely receive a “heart check,” i.e. a prisoner tests you. The majority prison consensus for this type of encounter? Fight. The good news is that there is no shame in losing a prison fight. Violence is so common that most prisoners, no matter how tough, have lost a fight during their stay. All that matters is you stood up. For those lacking skills, “flailing arms spaz mode” style seems the best option. It should be over pretty quickly. If you don’t fight, you’ll be labeled prey. This invites future b!tch slap humiliations and extortion. Extortion could mean turning over commissary items, or in more extreme cases, a family member wiring funds to a prisoner’s “girlfriend” to keep you healthy. Predatory prisoners love draining nest eggs. For those with money, refrain from bragging about past French Riviera vacations.
Most prison violence stems from gambling and drugs, especially in regard to debt. If you choose to indulge, pay as you go. Taking commissary on credit also entails risk. Some prisoners operate “stores” whereby they loan out one can of soup with the expectation of receiving two as repayment. Better to go hungry that night. Defaulting on prison debt gets you smashed or stabbed. On occasion, a soft younger inmate runs up a debt he can’t cover. Some creditors accept sexual favors as repayment. Once an inmate goes that route, there’s no coming back. For Boomers and fellow Gen Xers, even if so inclined, that escape hatch won’t be open to you. Nobody wants your old ugly ass. The takeaway—don’t run up prison debt.
Even if you play things right, you could still find yourself housed with a violent psychopath who doesn’t like your face. This could morph into a case of “kill or be killed.” Killing your adversary could get you a life sentence with transfer to a super-max dungeon. Legal self-defense doesn’t carry much weight in prison. If you stab or bludgeon him and he survives, you might only wind up with a few weeks or months in the hole (solitary confinement). Or you could add decades to your sentence and a super-max stay. How a facility’s administration deals with violent offenses varies from prison to prison. In some places, as long as you don’t give staff the paperwork headache of a body, they don’t care how extreme prisoner-on-prisoner violence gets. Alabama prison administrators are known for covering up prison homicides, which could work to your advantage if you need to take out an adversary. Conversely, this could work against you if you wind up on the receiving end of the shank.
When things get too heavy, some prisoners opt to “check-in” (enter protective custody (PC) /solitary confinement). Some guards want you to name your antagonizer(s) before letting you check-in, which technically makes you a “snitch.” Snitches and chomos (pedophiles) inhabit the lowest rung of the prison hierarchy. Not a good look. Even if you manage to enter PC without snitching, you’ll be labeled a “check-in.” At some point you go back into general population. A check-in label follows you for the rest of your stay and opens you up to victimization. If faced with an unreasonable predator, the better option might be to handle things yourself.
What about prison rape? While common back in the day, it’s been largely eradicated through PREA (Prison Rape Elimination Act) and current prison culture. In most prisons, a booty bandit who targeted straight males would get run off the yard, i.e. smashed. Plus, with all the openly gay prisoners today, there’s no reason for a booty bandit to take it by force. Many prison organizations forbid their members from engaging in gay sex. Members who pursue down-low activity risk a death sentence. Overall, messing with “boys” (effeminate prison gays) is looked down on, and most prisoners avoid it. The small percentage who practice that lifestyle do so openly and without fear of reprisal. No one’s calling a three-hundred-pound wall of granite a f@g. Or his “boy.”
Many large corporations utilize prison slave labor. According to zio-globalist Harvard University, on average, prisoners get paid ninety-three cents per day. Juxtaposed to these slave wages are real-world prices for prison goods and services. US prisons outsource food services, phone, internet, healthcare, commissary, and pretty much everything else to private corporations. To maximize profits, these corporations price gouge prisoners and cut services. Prison food is often rotten and inedible. If you don’t want to lose weight, you’ll need to buy commissary food at market prices. But how can you do that earning ninety-three cents a day? You can’t. If fortunate, you might have family members who put money on your books (prison account). Otherwise, you’ll need to form a “prison hustle.” This could include offering cell cleaning and laundry services, working as a jailhouse lawyer or tattoo artist, running a poker table, brewing prison wine, or selling drugs. Predatory prisoners simply take stuff off weaker inmates.
Prison living conditions can be quite bad. Institutions often go on lockdown for months. That means sharing a bathroom-sized cell with another man 24/7 until the lock pops. To me, this constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Imagine getting locked down with a cellie who snores like a Metallica concert bass amp. Or a psycho-maniac. As reported by the Miami Herald : “An inmate at Columbia Correctional Institution’s annex was able to strangle and mutilate his cellmate, gouge out his eyeballs, wrap his blood-soaked body in a sheet and walk into the prison’s chow hall wearing the dead inmate’s ear strung around his neck before officers learned anything was amiss.” Prisoners with psycho-maniac cellmates often develop severe PTSD from continuously sleeping with one eye open.
The lack of privacy in prison is obscene. That includes bathroom privacy. Full view-everything. Whoever invented this layout was a sick f*ck.
Prisoners are subject to regular “bend over, spread your cheeks and cough” level strip searches that would be humiliating if carried out by a licensed medical practitioner in a private patient room. Imagine performing this routine in front of snickering guards.
West Coast prisons practice racial segregation, i.e. races stay with their own. Fraternizing with a member of another race could get you smashed or stabbed. In West Coast prison politics, if a prisoner fights, it’s usually against someone from his race. If he gets victimized, it’s usually by an individual or group from his race. If two prisoners of different races have a beef, most times the shot callers of the respective races put the aggrieved parties into a cell and let them fight it out. After it’s over, the matter’s considered settled. If a prisoner goes into debt to someone from another race, members of the debtor’s race sometimes pay the debt and then smash or stab the debtor to avoid a race riot. An unsettled interracial beef can result in a race riot. If a race riot pops off, you’ll be expected to swing your lock-in-a-sock or shank for your race even if you have no involvement in the beef or know what it’s about. Anyone caught ducking out of a race riot gets smashed or stabbed by members of his race.
East Coast prisons are not racially segregated, although like in society, people tend to gravitate toward their own. However, strong bonds often develop between prisoners of different races.
In some institutions, prison organizations (gangs) control the internal politics. Higher-tier prison organizations resemble paramilitaries, as they possess a military top-down chain of command, written constitutions, well-trained soldiers with a high capacity for violence, mandatory boot camp level calisthenic regimens, large capital flows, and a reach that extends into the streets which includes access to serious arsenals. As per the Second Amendment, citizen militias still exist. Conversely, many prison organizations (gangs) lack structure and discipline and are more free-wheeling.
Prisoners join gangs for different reasons, e.g., protection, fellowship, thrills, resources. Joining a gang means following orders. This could include anything from stabbing a gang target to acting as a drug mule. Refusing an order could result in a death sentence. Like any major life decision, weigh the pros and cons carefully before signing on. As with civilian organizations, application standards vary. Some prison organizations want numbers, while others maintain a higher bar for entry. A case of “twenty-five pennies versus a quarter.”
Prison guards can be somewhat professional, corrupt, or sadistic. A nasty CO can make a prisoner’s life hell. Most COs just collect a paycheck and don’t care what happens to their charges. The Stanford Prison Experiment provides insight into guard psychology. Try to be respectful toward guards, but avoid fraternization, as this will cause some prisoners to label you a snitch.
It should be noted that the #MeToo psyop poses a unique danger to political prisoners. #MeToo started with Harvey Weinstein. I didn’t follow his case closely enough to comment on how far Weinstein’s actions went past the Hollywood casting couch quid pro quo that has existed since the days of silent movies and into the classic legal definition of rape. Weinstein was a connected insider. His circle of friends included Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey. He was a rabid Hollywood Zionist with Mossad ties. To his credit, Miramax offered up some decent movies in the 90s. Weinstein appeared to run with the “above the law” crowd, however, the donor class sometimes sacrifices one of its own when politically expedient. I don’t know why they chose Weinstein. Julian Assange became the first major “enemy of the state” #MeToo victim. Once the globalists had him in their clutches, his “rape” charges quickly and quietly vanished. Comedian-political commentator Russell Brand appears to be the latest #MeToo target.
#MeToo framed political prisoners entering prison with “bad paperwork” or sex offender status get greenlit. That means open season for extortion, smashing, and slashing. It could even mean a death sentence. Real rape is a terrible crime that traumatizes the female victim. However, from my viewpoint, throwing fake sex crime charges at an innocent man is an equal or worse crime. The Bible says – “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” It’s serious sh!t. Any woman or operative who participates in such a horrific charade deserves an appropriate response. If the Deep State #MeToo frameup trend continues. I respectfully suggest that the heads of convict-code based prison organizations (gangs) consider secondary in-house trials for “sex crime convicted” political prisoners to determine if the charges are real or state fabrications.
In summary, from my review of the data, best prison practices include:
- Mind your business aka “do your own time.” If you involve yourself, you’re involved, i.e., the violent predator who was the other guy’s problem becomes your problem. In a similar vein, never look into another prisoner’s cell when passing by it. Not only is that considered rude, but if he’s in the middle of hiding contraband and his cell gets searched later, guess who he’s blaming.
- Don’t snitch.
- Avoid gambling, borrowing, (hard) drugs, and “boys.”* (*No offense to gay people. It’s prison politics).
- Practice C&R (Courtesy and Respect). “Please, thank you, and excuse me” go a long way in civilian life, but even further in prison.
- Choose solid associates (“friends”). You’ll be judged by the company you keep. If your associate gets into a beef, you’ll be expected to back him up, and vice versa. Someone prone to drama could drag you in. If your associate borrows heavily and checks in or gets transferred, his debts could pass on to you.
For those facing potential incarceration for “hate speech,” “spreading misinformation,” questioning election results, posting offensive memes, attending protests, or similar crimes, I hope this article helps. If you need more data, there are informative YouTube channels hosted by ex-prisoners.
While prison seems to be the modality of choice, please note that the Deep State can always exercise the ultimate option to neutralize enemies. See Wikileaks DNC whistleblower Seth Rich. Or the quixotic veteran who believed in free and fair elections. Her name is Ashli Babbitt.
We live in a society run by criminals. Goldman Sachs stole way more money than John Dillinger, and the worst child killer pales in comparison to Madeleine Albright, who starved five hundred thousand Iraqi children to death and bragged about it on network television. The “rules” don’t apply to the donor class.
Outsourcing of jobs, endless war, corporate welfare, and banker theft increased poverty and raised crime levels. Formerly productive regions of the US became opioid/meth/crime/poverty zones. While prisons warehouse violent predators who pose a serious threat to public safety, it’s not uncommon for innocent poor people to take shorter sentence plea deals rather than risk going to trial with a checked-out public defender and potentially receiving a decades-long sentence. As America sinks further into third-worldism and despotism, former law-abiding citizens might need to go “Walter White” to pay medical bills, avoid homelessness, or practice basic civil rights.
Just like the Military Industrial Complex requires endless wars for its business model, the for-profit Prison Industrial Complex needs to fill beds. An influx of thought/political criminals into the system floats stocks. Not surprising that end-stage neoliberal capitalism America has the world’s highest incarceration rate.
For those who cheered Reagan-Clinton mandatory-minimum sentencing for nonviolent drug offenses while the CIA shipped in freight loads of coke and heroin to inner cities and the Sacklers drowned the heartland in a sea of opioids- congratulations, you’ve arrived at gulag nation. Welcome home son.
Biden’s plan to ‘revive Palestinian Authority’ fizzles out: Report
The Cradle | December 26, 2023
The US government has run into a significant hurdle in its campaign to “revitalize” the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority (PA) as possible successors to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, failing to convince Israel to unblock funds necessary to prevent the PA from total collapse.
“Even if we agreed [to take over for Hamas in Gaza], how can we implement it? The policy of Israel is to weaken the authority, not strengthen it,” PA Deputy Prime Minister Nabil Abu Rudeineh told the Washington Post. “We cannot even pay the salaries of our soldiers, our employees,” he added.
Despite round-the-clock visits to the heavily fortified PA headquarters in Ramallah and meetings with Israeli authorities, US officials have made little progress in securing the release of millions in Palestinian tax money that Israel has blocked since 7 October.
Two months ago, the Israeli finance ministry – led by Jewish supremacist official Bezalel Smotrich – froze the transfer of tax revenues amounting to some $188 million monthly to the PA.
“The PA didn’t see fit to distance itself from these barbarian actions, and officials in the authority even expressed support for the awful massacre […] Furthermore, the PA is acting against Israel at the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice,” Smotrich said on 30 October.
The tax revenues – known in Palestine as maqasa – are collected by the Israeli government on behalf of the PA on Palestinian imports and exports. Israel earns a commission of 3 percent of collected revenues.
On Friday, the European Commission said it was preparing a $130 million aid package to help plug the gap.
According to Sabri Saidam, a member of the central committee for the Fatah party and close adviser to PA President Mahmoud Abbas, plans for Palestinians to receive their tax revenue have “collapsed.”
Besides finding ways to avert the financial collapse of the PA, US officials have also been pushing for “changes and new faces in key positions” in a last-ditch effort to improve the public image of the deeply unpopular organization.
According to a recent poll from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, 88 percent of Palestinians want Abbas to resign as PA President, up 10 points from three months ago.
Meanwhile, the popularity of Hamas has soared in the occupied West Bank, from 12 percent to 44 percent.
“It’s always this colonizing mentality, whereby, ‘We decide your leadership, we are the ones basically designing your strategy for the day after, we tell you how to live, we tell you how to breathe, and we tell you how to run your land,’” Saidam told the Washington Post.
The PA was established in 1994 based on the first Oslo Accords (1993) between Tel Aviv and the now-defunct Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). It was initially established as a temporary governing body to lay the foundation for an independent Palestinian state.
However, after decades of corruption allegations, collaboration scandals, and a poor human rights record, the PA was in a state of “total inertia” before the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation unfolded on 7 October.
Complicating matters further for Washington, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is staunchly opposed to a PA-controlled Gaza.
“Expectation that the Palestinian Authority will demilitarize Gaza is a pipe dream,” Netanyahu says in an op-ed published by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) on Monday.
“[The PA] has shown neither the capability nor the will to demilitarize Gaza,” the premier added, claiming that Ramallah “currently funds and glorifies terrorism […] and educates Palestinian children to seek the destruction of Israel.”
“For the foreseeable future, Israel will have to retain overriding security responsibility over Gaza,” Netanyahu stressed.
Ukrainian opposition politician jailed for five years
RT | December 26, 2023
A court in Ukraine has sentenced a member of a banned opposition party to five years behind bars for expressing pro-Russian views in private conversations. The man, whose name has not been revealed, had served on the Cherkasy City Council before becoming an aide to an MP in the country’s parliament.
In March 2022, the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine suspended the activities of the Opposition Platform – For Life political party. The authorities accused the party of operating in the interest of Moscow. It was eventually banned by a court ruling several months later.
In a message on its Telegram channel on Monday, Ukraine’s Office of the Prosecutor General revealed that the defendant was found “guilty of justifying the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and glorifying its participants.”
According to the prosecutors, the former municipal council member aired his pro-Russian views “in conversations with his close relatives and acquaintances.” The man is said to have extolled Russia’s actions in Ukraine as well as President Vladimir Putin personally.
Officials quoted the defendant as saying: “To Russia’s victory on our long-suffering Ukrainian soil! It needs to be cleansed.”
Earlier, the Office of the Prosecutor General reported levelling similar charges against a 62-year-old woman, who is also from the city of Cherkasy in Central Ukraine. The authorities said they believed she had justified Russia’s actions and compared the Ukrainian government to the Nazis in a phone conversation with her friend.
In 2020, criminal charges of high treason were filed against the former leader of the Opposition Platform – For Life, Viktor Medvedchuk, over his visit to Moscow, where he had met with top Russian officials. Sometime later, the politician was put under house arrest. However, in late February 2022, around the time Russia launched its military action against its neighbor, Medvedchuk absconded. He was recaptured several months later, and handed over to Moscow as part of a prisoner swap deal last September.
The exiled opposition figure has continued to criticize President Vladimir Zelensky’s administration. Earlier this month, Medvedchuk opined that the current leadership in Kiev has “turned out to be not just bad negotiators, but criminal amateurs.” He also accused the Ukrainian head of state of selling “out [Ukrainians] for cannon fodder” after being promised Western aid.
The politician claimed that President Zelensky is averse to the idea of peace negotiations with Moscow because such talks would prove to be a “sentence for Zelensky, not only political, but also criminal,” with Ukrainians likely to start asking him tough questions.
Featured Video
Thomas Fazi: NATO’s Hybrid Warfare – Deception & Permanent War
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
UAE tortured, killed journalist for opposing Israel normalization
The Cradle | October 31, 2026
UAE security officers detained, tortured, and killed Emirati poet and news editor Habib al-Sayegh in August 2019, shortly after he published a column opposing UAE normalization with Israel, according to a newly published book.
“Princes and Thieves,” a book by investigative journalist Matthew Cole published on 25 October, alleges that UAE security officers raided Sayegh’s Abu Dhabi home shortly after the publication of the column, hooded him in front of his wife and took him to a detention facility where he was tortured to death.
His interrogators reportedly pulled out several of his teeth with pliers and beat him repeatedly with a sharp metal object.
On 11 August 2019, Sayegh criticized the UAE’s plan to normalize relations with Israel as part of the Abraham Accords in his weekly column for Khaleej newspaper. The column was titled “Israel Is Our Real Enemy and A Dangerous Project.”
Sayegh described Israel as “a real and natural enemy” while questioning “who authorized the normalizers to speak on behalf of everyone?”
Nine days after the column was published, Emirati state media announced his death, without stating a cause. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- ‘The Arab Vote’: How Israeli Racism Has Ruined Their Elections
- Israel forces Palestinians in Gaza to choose between assassination alone or death with their families: Report
- US Approves Sale of 500 Patriot Missiles to Ukraine, Deliveries May Take Years
- German Imperialism: An Urgent Explainer
- Backed by AAP, West Virginia Proposal Would Allow Dental Hygienists to Give HPV Vaccine to 9-Year-Olds
- Poland Is the Symptom and Europe Is the Patient
- UAE security forces tortured, killed journalist for opposing Israel normalization: Report
- They Compared the Spice to the Drug. The Spice Won — Again. (Part 2)
- Thomas Fazi: NATO’s Hybrid Warfare – Deception & Permanent War
- Wrong, AP and NPR: Europe’s 50,000 Heat Deaths Are a Computer-Model Estimate, Not a Real Body Count
- 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!
