Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Have 400,000 Americans Died of Covid-19?

By Celia Farber | Uncover DC | January 25, 2021

Many assumed, lots screamed it, but now there is proof: The Covid-19 death count is a fabrication. However, the story is much bigger than number manipulation within our government. It’s a story told best with an introduction. For those who may be impatient, scroll down to the section titled “The Natural Enemy of the PSYOP is the True Scientist” and read from there. Otherwise, learn what they have done and will continue to do. Learn about the PSYOP.

A Scientist Finds Something Shocking In CDC Covid Stats

“In less than 12 months, they closed our businesses, forced us to wear muzzles, kept us from our families, killed off our sports, burned down our cities, forcibly seized power.
Then they accused us of the coup.” — Raheem Kassam.

“Besides being the first President to get impeached twice, Donald Trump will have a stain on his legacy with arguably longer-lasting consequences: He’s about to become the only American leader in a century with more than 400,000 deaths from one event on his watch.” — Jose Ortiz, USA Today.

“But, you know, I feel more fellowship with the defeated than with saints. Heroism and sanctity don’t really appeal to me, I imagine. What interests me is being a man.” — Albert Camus

“I don’t want to jump up and down and start screaming, ‘Death! Death!’” — Donald Trump

A PSYOP is a most dangerous thing—a fusion of reality, simulation, and projection. A form of a storm—monsoon or typhoon—that moves in fast, breaks and soaks, changes everything, and kills in a variety of ways.

Its guilt grip is so powerful, you will also be stripped of the right to reject or even resent it. Powerful and merciless, it splits people, weaponizes our thoughts and feelings about one another, tears apart families, old friendships, gets people fired, and above all, makes everybody miserable.

Even when it’s wrong (and it’s always wrong), you can’t put an end to it. It is essentially mass media’s mental implants that people mistake for their own thoughts and feelings. It violently demands certain “emotions” while it cruelly strips away all individual, natural human ones.

PSYOPS, or “Influence Operations,” don’t have to correlate with reality because they create a new hyper-reality, seen only through specific virtual reality goggles. Inside the virtualized media dome, all of its promises come true, funnily enough—like clockwork, whereas a natural story will contain surprise twists.

The generators and controllers of the PSYOPS know how to use large numbers with which to savagely club people. If a number is suspiciously big and suspiciously even, you can be sure it is a PSYOP number.

Right now, we are all being clobbered hard by the number 400,000—but none so viciously as former President Donald Trump.

The 400,000 PSYOP was timed to coincide with the days before, during, and after Joe Biden’s inauguration. Thus, Donald Trump was accused of essentially killing all “400,000,” as the Empire State Building lit up in red (the same color as the AIDS PSYOP, now retired). It was suggested on National Public Radio that perhaps Donald Trump should be executed for this crime.

The media drums on the 400,000 began just before Joe Biden’s Covid-centric inauguration. A few headlines bearing the accusation of genocide:

“Blood On His Hands’: As US nears 400,000 Covid-19 deaths, experts blame Trump administration for a ‘preventable’ loss of life.” USA Today, Jan 17

  “One Year, 400,000 coronavirus deaths: How the US Guaranteed Its Own Failure.” The New York Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Baltimore Sun, Jan 17.

These media attacks brought together the two titanic PSYOPS of our era: Trump Is Hitler and Covid is Eternal Mass Death. In the second week of January, the two mated, giving birth to a new PSYOP, never fully flogged before, namely: Covid is Eternal Mass death because of Trump.

 Covid is not a respiratory illness so much as a blunt force perception and guilt weapon to “kill” Donald Trump with. Decent people can’t locate what former President Trump did wrong exactlyNor why none of this was the highly paid and revered Dr. Anthony Fauci’s responsibility, especially since he said years ago, ominously, that President Trump could “expect” a new pandemic during his tenure.  (For the record, I think what he did wrong was to listen to Anthony Fauci. This was no minor error; The country has fallen.) But the Covid PSYOP has that precisely the other way around.

Here’s a cloudy, highly revealing PSYOP-adherent Trump flogging from Nathalie Baptiste, writing in Mother Jones, with all the cliches in bold:

“The staggering death toll was both preventable and entirely predictable. Even aside from his vast personal incompetence—we’ll get to that later—President Trump blithely put into practice cherished conservative principles that are incompatible with a decent pandemic response. Castigating and de-legitimizing government institutions, demonizing minority communities, and playing into white grievances may help Republicans win elections, but when it comes to beating back a massive public health catastrophe, what’s paramount is robust public agencies, a strong health care system, and special attention to the vulnerable. In many ways, we were doomed from the start.”

Incredibly, this is from the side that claims to believe in science.

I was troubled enough to see the spate of articles and TV reports chiming the 400,000 death bells, but soon I saw what it was preparation for: The inauguration.

US Vice President-elect Kamala Harris (2nd L) and husband Douglas Emhoff and US President-elect Joe Biden (R) and wife Dr. Jill Biden attend a Covid-19 Memorial at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC, on January 19, 2021, to honor the lives of those lost to Covid-19. (Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP)

Biden/Harris and their production teams had long since made this new number—400,000—centrally symbolic to its eerie, choreographed, virtualized inauguration ceremony.

Milan Kundera called this kind of thing “Communist Kitsch.” Exploiting the dead (no matter what they, in truth, died of, but primarily old age), the pageant was all about Covid, with flags representing those who could not attend due to the Covid Scare and the Domestic Terrorism (from Patriots) scare. Throughout the ceremony, those who died “of Covid” were remembered, though no mention of those who have died from lockdowns. PSYOPS hyper-direct our allowed emotions. In the end, the supposed “blood on hands” of the outgoing President was fused with the (dark) triumphalism of the incoming one. Meaning: The very theme of Biden’s Presidency would not be, say, America, but rather, “Covid.” Don’t serve America; serve Covid, as the new America. The new America is actually America inverted, prepared, and served up to The Great Reset and the final destruction of all human freedoms, in the name of a “virus” you may not question without risking prison.

Little detail: 400,000 Americans did not die of “Covid-19” in 2020. Neither did half that number. Nor a third, nor one 10th. If we are generous to the scare-mongers, the real number is only 4.2% of the genocidal drama number, 400,000, namely: 16,848.

And if they were held to further scrutiny and forced to explain the difference between an influenza death and a Covid death, the number would go down even further, possibly down to zero.

The Natural Enemy of the PSYOP is the True Scientist

Unbeknownst (of course) to the architects of the two Covid PSYOPS of 2020 and 2021, an atmospheric scientist in Greensprings, Oregon, himself unafraid of controversy, was putting the finishing touches on a Covid-19 paper hed begun to write three months earlier.

The bombshell paper is titled: “A Critical Review of CDC USA Data on Covid-19: PCR/Antigen Tests & Cases Reveal Herd Immunity Only, & Do Not Warrant Public Hysteria or Lockdown.” It was posted on two of his academic webpages on 16 Jan 2021. The links are here and here.

In it, Dr. James DeMeo, Ph.D., demolishes the central premise of global lockdown policies. That people are dying in massive and alarming numbers from a novel disease. He’d been waiting for the final statistics to come in for 2020. When they did, he noticed two spectacularly odd things:

Firstly, if one subtracted the numbers of Covid deaths (around 315,000) from the total number of people who died from all causes in 2020 (around 2.9 million), one obtained a dramatically low number of total deaths, lower than in any year since 2014. It appeared to him that the reported number of “Covid” deaths were being re-defined and subtracted from other causes of deaths; the people who died of “co-morbidities” were being shifted over into the Covid category.

Secondly, on January 3rd, the CDC released its year-end count of all-cause deaths in one dramatically high number—268,259 to be exact.

These deaths did not appear anywhere in the CDC’s records previously but turn up as a “data dump” in the very first days of 2021, as though there had been some catastrophic event or mass die-off of older Americans in a single week. In a very unsettling way, it echoed the middle of the night miraculous Joe Biden lead over Donald Trump between Nov 3 and 4, 2020.  

“I have never seen anything like it,” said Dr. DeMeo, when I reached him at home to discuss his paper, which a mutual friend had brought to my attention.

“It’s extremely odd. The only thing I can compare it to is when people in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission were trying to cover up large radiation discharges from nuclear power plants. They took the radiation levels and put a “0.” They were stupid; they didn’t realize, background radiation never goes to zero.”

But where might those deaths have come from? I pressed.

“I could not tell you,” DeMeo replied“The end of year data I used was the CDC’s data as of Dec 26, and that was a figure of 2 million 900,000 deaths from all causes with 301,679 deaths from Covid. I went to Our World In Data—they have a dynamic, interactive graph. You can hold your mouse over any part of the graph, and it will show you the numbers. That’s how I got my numbers. It did not have this massive data dump. There was nothing like that.”

“I cannot know what the heck happened. Why would they dump so many all-cause deaths on that last week? There was no atom bomb going off, in Miami or some other place where a lot of old people live, to kill that many people at the tail end of December. I tried calling the AP reporter who first came out with an article around Christmas where he said there would be 3-3.2 million deaths in the US—he made it sound like most would be from Covid.”

The Dec 22, 2020 article Dr. Demeo refers to was written by Mike Stobbe in AP. It opens:

“This is the deadliest year in U.S. history, with deaths expected to top 3 million for the first time—due mainly to the coronavirus pandemic. Final mortality data for this year will not be available for months. But preliminary numbers suggest that the United States is on track to see more than 3.2 million deaths this year, or at least 400,000 more than in 2019.”

DeMeo remarks:

 “When people hear “cases in the millions” They start thinking of people who are dying and on the way to death or who have already died, and it’s not true, but they’re not even trying to clarify that to the public. They’re very deliberately sending people into a panic. It’s irresponsible as hell.”

DeMeo says he sent Stobbe an email, asking him what statistics he was referencing.

“I didn’t get a response.”

DeMeo is well equipped to deconstruct Covid statistics if that word even applies anymore.

I’m a geographer and an atmospheric scientist by training; we work with data sets of all different kinds. Moisture, humidity, barometric pressure, and so on. Agriculture and human health, Climate factors around the world. I have a background in epidemiology, and I used to teach university courses covering epidemiology and population dynamics. So I’m used to looking at those kinds of numbers, and they just didn’t make any sense. So that’s how it all got uncovered.”

The mutual friend who brought the paper to my attention was Tom DiFerdinando, who’s worked closely with Dr. DeMeo on various research projects for many years, and has a long history deconstructing medical tyranny. He is the President of a Non-Profit called “Unmasking Covid and AIDS.” His email, clarifying the “trick,” put it like this:

If there were 315,507 excess deaths due to Covid-19, why is the difference in all-cause deaths between the end of 2020 and the end of 2019 only 61,654? That’s 61,654 more all-cause deaths in 2020 than in 2019, where the increase in all-cause deaths over each of the past ten years has averaged 44,806. That’s a difference of 16,848 from the median in a year with an alleged 315,507 extra Covid-related deaths.

When you subtract the alleged 2020 Covid death total from the all-cause 2020 death total, i.e., 2,916,492 – 315,507, you get 2,600,985.

That figure, 2,600,985, is less than the all-cause death counts each year going back to 2014! That means the total death count for all fatal diseases and accidents in 2020, excluding Covid-19, dropped mysteriously and substantially—right about to the same degree that Covid-19 went up. For the Covid deaths to be genuinely new “excess” deaths, that all-cause total of 2.9 million—which already includes “Covid-19” deaths—should be something like 3.2 million, with an annual increase in 2020 of 376,000 deaths, not 61,000. 

What these two points mean, of course, is that the 315,507 Covid death count does not represent Covid deaths but a displacement of deaths from other causes.

In his January 7 postscript, DeMeo catches the CDC red-handed. Earlier in the paper, he points out, as I did above, that there are nearly 300,000 missing deaths in the all-cause category for the numbers to pan out. On that day, Jan 7, he discovered the CDC had suddenly added 269,249 all-cause deaths into their end of year all-cause death totals!

Evidently, 269,249 people suddenly died in the last week of 2020. How convenient for the Covid narrative!

In a phone interview, DiFerdinando elaborated:

“Without those added deaths, there would be no evidence of a Covid pandemic,” he said. ”This triangulation of facts: essentially no excess deaths beyond the normal annual background count; absolutely NO relationship between Covid “confirmed” cases and Covid “confirmed” deaths; and the mysterious, last-minute dump of 268,259 all-cause deaths into the 2020 end-of-year all-cause death totals; completely demolish any pretext of their having been a 2020 viral pandemic, whether caused by a novel coronavirus or by anything else and that therefore there is no rational reason to  be putting masks on children, isolating elders, destroying businesses, locking down populations and shattering the public trust.”

Says Dr. DeMeo:

“The people who are dying of so-called Covid, it’s all happening in the wintertime. So, all this correlates with the idea that this is a big error, a big mistake. Maybe with nefarious motivations. You don’t even have to reference why to understand that it is indeed a falsehood, the whole construct of a Covid pandemic. The numbers do not lie; the numbers tell the story. Where are the massive, massive numbers of people dying, which you would correlate with positive PCR and antigen tests, which is what you would expect to happen. People who are dying of old age diseases, they’re re-defining them as Covid 19, but the symptomatology is so exactly similar to influenza and other lung diseases.”

It comes down to a truly devastating assault of PSYOP by media and a fast-growing class of super-predators; Covid careerists. We must have our lives destroyed because they must assert and enrich themselves.

“I would not trust anything I read in the American newspapers or media, Johns Hopkins, CDC, WHO—all untrustworthy,” says DeMeo. “Where are they coming up with 400,000 deaths?” He continues. “They’re talking about approximately 318,000 people who died as of Jan 2.  Where are they coming up with… in 15 days they are saying they’ve identified another 75,000 dead? I don’t think so. This is data magic.”

One of the most astonishing features of “Covid 19” is that nobody can quite define what it is or why it is so spectacular as to force almost the entire world into lock-down.

“I think what we’re dealing with absolutely is a confusion of ordinary lung and heart diseases that take out a lot of old people as they approach the end of their lives,” says DeMeo. “And it’s being redefined in very ugly ways.

“What’s going on with influenza statistics? They’ve gone down to a very low number, the figure I found was 0.2%. Two-tenths of one percent, when at this time of year, we should be having something between 5 and 20 percent. In terms of the number of influenza deaths, that happens every winter. The numbers they are throwing out make no sense whatsoever.”

Shortly before press time, Dr. Demeo followed up, having cross-checked his numbers yet again. He wrote in an email:

“I now feel fully confident that my method for making that excess deaths calculation is the best and most scientific method possible, given all the other factors revealed in the paper. It may actually be the only scientifically-sound method, making the fewest assumptions. I could stand before Fauci or any of them with high confidence. They are like powdered-wig fops and dandies in the French Court of the Louies, commanding “respect” only due to position and faux-authority, but not by scientific accuracy or empathy for the ordinary people they were appointed to serve.”

From the towers of academic science to bold citizen journalism, “Covid 19” has been assailed all around the world as the least credible, most diabolical pack of lies ever launched upon innocent people.

Richard Citizen Journalist has posted many videos to his Twitter feed, inside US hospitals, always empty. His Profile says: “Empty Hospitals Are The Smoking Gun.”

This video is his pinned Tweet:

https://twitter.com/DPotcner/status/1290105857452077056?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1290105857452077056%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Funcoverdc.com%2F2021%2F01%2F25%2Fhave-400000-americans-died-of-covid-19%2F

Scientist, Social Theorist, and former Professor of Physics Denis Rancourt tweeted:

And one of my favorite ever Covid tweets came from Dr. Thomas Bender, one of the 22 authors of the paper, requesting withdrawal of the Corman/Drosten paper that spawned this whole nightmare with an unavailable viral isolate turned into a global hell-PSYOP, presumably for economic and socio-political reasons. He wrote:

Dr. Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., also an author of the challenge to the Corman/Drosten PCR paper, said in a telephone call from London:

“This paper joins the ranks of academic works around the world, all pointing to the same conclusion: They’re lying. They’re doing it very deliberately, and we all know statistics are a convenient tool of the Big Lie. At this point, the actual statistical and epidemiological case for Covid-19 being a real pandemic is closed. To honest people, it’s closed. We’re done.”

The PSYOP, however, is a beast that must be fed daily, hourly, new variations of mangled, manipulated numbers, new scenarios intended to scare you anew into submission. The PSYOP depends upon you reacting with fear and guilt. Don’t be afraid, therefore, and don’t feel guilty for not being afraid. None of us know when our lives will end, but let us remain fully human—alive, loving, and trusting—until that time comes.

As Albert Camus wrote in his most famous novel, The Plague, where the real plague winds up being something well beyond the illness:

“And he knew, also, what the old man was thinking as his tears flowed, and he, Rieux, thought it too: that a loveless world is a dead world, and always there comes an hour when one is weary of prisons, of one’s work, and of devotion to duty, and all one craves for is a loved face, the warmth, and wonder of a loving heart.”


Celia Farber is half Swedish, raised there, so she knows “socialism” from the inside. She has focused her writings on freedom and tyranny, with an early focus on the pharmaceutical industry and media abuses on human liberties. She has been under ferocious attack for her writings on HIV/AIDS, where she has worked to document the topic as a psychological operation and rooted in fake science. She is a contributor to UncoverDC and The Epoch Times and has in the past written for Harper’s, Esquire, Rolling Stone, and more. Having been gravely injured in legacy media, she never wants to go back. She is the recipient of the Semmelweis International Society Clean Hands Award For Investigative Journalism and was under such attack for her work; she briefly sought protection from the FBI and NYPD. She is the author of “Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS” and the editor of The Truth Barrier, an investigative and literary website. She co-hosts “The Whistleblower Newsroom” with Kristina Borjesson on PRN, Fridays at 10 am.

Twitter: @CeliaFarber

Web: www.truthbarrier.com 

FB: Celia Ingrid Farber

January 31, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

The Largest Experiment on Humans Ever Seen

By Rob Slane | The BlogMire | January 30, 2021

Which is the more reasonable approach a society might take in the outbreak of epidemic:

To quarantine the sick, and take reasonable precautions to stop those who are identified as vulnerable from contracting the illness.

To attempt to “control the virus” by preventing millions of healthy people from having contact with other healthy people.

To any society prior to 2020, it would have been obvious that the first approach is not only logical and proportionate, but the one least likely to have other unintended and highly destructive consequences. However, to my continued astonishment, many in our society not only believe that the answer is the second, but they somehow believe it to be based on established science.

Now I understand that many who support Lockdown will object to my characterisation of their position. They will say that it is deliberately misleading, since it talks about healthy people, and does not mention the sick. Such objections founder, however, on this undeniable fact: Lockdowns are, by their nature, an entirely untargeted and indiscriminate approach to a health issue, and the prohibiting by law of millions of healthy people from having contact with other healthy people is a feature, not a bug of a policy that was untried and untested before it was first implemented by the Chinese Communist Party in January last year, then copied by many Governments around the world thereafter.

For some reason, many Lockdownists seem to think that the onus is on Lockdown opponents to disprove their position. But as Dr Malcolm Kendrick points out in his excellent piece – Does Lockdown Work or Not, this is the opposite of how things are supposed to work:

“The starting point, for any scientific hypothesis, is for the proponents to disprove the null hypothesis. Demanding that those who believe something may not work, to prove that it doesn’t, is to turn the scientific method upside down. You can never prove a negative.”

Even so, he goes on to point out that most of the countries with the highest deaths per million are those which had fairly stringent Lockdowns, and therefore the data so far most certainly does not show that Lockdowns are effective, even on their own terms. Of course, Covidian Logic always has an answer to this, which is that these Lockdowns weren’t real Lockdowns. They were too little, too late, too soft, too lenient, too short, too small, too purple or something like that! But they can never be wrong. Low death rates show they work. High death rates show they would have worked if only people hadn’t been bad.

But the main point I wish to make about them is that they are not something that has been proposed, studied or trialled before, but are an entirely new practice, foisted upon the world for the first time in 2020. Which means what? It means that they are an experiment in real time. It means that our society (along with many others) has for the last year, and continues to be for the foreseeable future, subject to an experiment. In fact, the largest psychological, social and experiment ever conducted.

When I use this sort of language, it tends to meet the following mocking response: “So are you saying it’s all a mass conspiracy? Who’s the puppet-master then?” But this just misses the point. It does not need some Dark Lord sitting over all of it in order to be an experiment, although it has to be said that the likes of Professor Schwab do seem keen on putting themselves forward as pretty good candidates. No, it simply is by definition a psychological, social and economic experiment by the very nature of the fact that the mass quarantining and mass masking of millions of people, which cannot fail to change the psychology, society and economy, are untried, untested methods, based merely on hypothesis, and not on hard data. In fact, the data is still coming in from this enormous experiment, but as Dr Kendrick says, it doesn’t actually look good for the hypothesis:

“… I would conclude that the observational studies had – thus far – failed to disprove the null hypothesis. In fact, the evidence up to this point could suggest that lockdowns may actually increase the death rate. In short, I would look for another idea.”

But the psychological, social and economic experimentation are by no means the end of it. We have now moved on to the medical experimentation, by which I mean the giving of so-called “vaccines” to millions of people (so-called because they don’t actually stop people getting the virus, and it is not yet known whether they prevent transmission).

Incredibly, if you look at the Pfizer BioNTech SE Clinical Study Trial on the US National Library of Medicine Clinical Trials database, you will notice something very odd, which is that the Estimated Study Completion Date is on January 31st 2023. This is:

“the date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events.”

In other words, the medium to long-term side effects of this product cannot possibly be known, because the study is still ongoing. The long and short of it, as Professor Sucharit Bhakdi points out in this excellent interview (watch it soon before the YouTube Gatekeepers scrub it) is this: every single person now getting these jabs is effectively an unwitting test subject in the largest medical experiment ever carried out, having been asked to give their consent to receive a product injected into their bodies without being properly informed as to the status of the product.

Simply put, neither those administering these jabs nor those receiving them can have any idea of the potential medium to long-term consequences of these things, because the companies producing them have not completed the studies on them. And no, it is not the mark of an anti-vaxxer to be deeply concerned about this (I am not); it is just the mark of having one’s critical faculties in working order and of caring about what is being done to people – it’s called Loving Your Neighbour as Yourself.

In summary, both Lockdowns and the “vaccines” are essentially a mass experiment on humanity. The mid to long-term consequences of both are entirely unknown. Future generations will marvel at how the authorities were able to do this, but they will marvel even more at how millions of people acquiesced without much thought. None of this can possibly bode well. We need to humble ourselves and take a long hard look at what we are doing, or allowing to be done to us, as a matter of the utmost urgency.

January 31, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

What Happened to JFK and a Foreign Policy of Peace?

By Rick Sterling | Global Research | January 27, 2021

Sixty years ago, John F Kennedy (JFK) was inaugurated as president of the USA. In less than three years, before he was assassinated in November 1963, he initiated major changes in foreign policy.

These foreign policy changes are documented in books such as “JFK and the Unspeakable” (2008) and “Betting on the Africans” (2012). One of the foremost scholars on JFK, James Di Eugenio, has an excellent new article of the Kennedy foreign policy at Covert Action : “Deconstructing JFK: A Coup d’Etat over Foreign Policy?”. Despite this literature, many people in the West do not realize the extent to which JFK was an exception. This article will briefly review some of the actions he took while alive, and what happened after he was gone.

While JFK was a staunch advocate for capitalism and the “free world”, in competition with the Soviet Union and communism, he promoted acceptance of non-aligned countries and supported nationalist movements in Africa, the Middle East and Third World generally. In the summer before he was killed, he reached out to the Soviet Union and proposed sweeping changes to promote peace and prevent war.

The previous Eisenhower administration was hostile to post WW2 nationalist movements in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. In 1953 the CIA supervised the overthrow of Iran’s elected government. They supported the Saudi monarch and undermined the popular Egyptian Nasser. In contrast, Kennedy was sympathetic to the “winds of change” in Africa and beyond. He criticized France’s repression of the Algerian independence movement and was sympathetic to Patrice Lumumba leading the Congo’s independence from Belgium. Kennedy worked with UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold to preserve Congo’s independence and try to restore Lumumba to power. The CIA managed to have Patrice Lumumba executed three days before Kennedy’s inauguration.

Under Kennedy, the United States started voting against the European colonial powers in Africa. Kennedy provided tangible aid to Nasser in Egypt. After Kennedy’s death, the US policy returned to support for European powers and CIA intervention. The US supported NATO ally Portugal in its wars in Angola, Mozambique, and Guinea Bissau. The US supported secessionist and tribal forces in the Congo, Angola, Somalia, and many other countries with hugely damaging results. The US supported apartheid South Africa until the end. The US supported the sectarian Muslim Brotherhood against Nasser.

This was also a critical time for Israel Palestine. JFK was more objective and balanced that most US politicians. Just 22 years old in 1939, Kennedy visited Palestine and wrote his observations / analysis in a 4 page letter to his father. He is thoughtful and recognizes the Palestinian perspective. He speaks of the “unfortunately arrogant, uncompromising attitude” of some Jewish leaders. In May 2019, more documents were released from the National Security Archives. They show that JFK, as president, was intent on stopping Israel from surreptitiously building a nuclear weapon. In a letter to the new Israeli Prime Minister Eshkol, Kennedy gives a diplomatic ultimatum that US support of Israel will be “seriously jeopardized” if Israel did not comply with inspection visits to the Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. After JFK’s death, the Johnson administration was submissive to Israel and pro-Israel supporters. Johnson showed the ultimate political subservience by preventing the rescue and hiding Israeli treachery regarding the USS Liberty. The Israeli attack killed 34 and injured 172 US sailors. Would Israel have had the arrogance and chutzpah to do this if Kennedy had been in the White House? Unlikely.

The invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs took place just three months after Kennedy took office. The CIA and generals expected Kennedy to provide US air support for the anti-Castro attackers. Kennedy said no and resolved to get rid of the long-standing CIA Director who had managed the operation. Allen Dulles and two Deputy Directors were forced to resign by the end of the year. The Pentagon, CIA and anti-Castro Cubans were furious at JFK. When the Soviet Union sent nuclear capable missiles to Cuba, the hawks demanded that the US attack. Kennedy opposed this and ended up negotiating an agreement whereby the US removed its nuclear missiles in Turkey as Soviet nuclear missiles were removed from Cuba.

Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country with vast natural resources and strategic location. President Sukarno led the country to independence and was a leader in the global Non-Aligned Movement seeking a middle ground between the poles of the USA and Soviet Union. The Eisenhower/Dulles administration tried to overthrow Sukarno. In contrast, JFK changed the policy from hostility to friendship. Sukarno invited JFK to visit the country and the invitation was accepted. Following JFK’s assassination, the policy returned to hostility and just two years later, in 1965, the US engineered a coup leading to the murder of about half a million Indonesian citizens suspected of being communist.

JFK visited Vietnam in 1951 as the French colonial powers were trying to assert their control. He saw the situation as 400,000 French soldiers were losing to the Vietnamese nationalist movement. Thus, when he became president, he was skeptical of the prospects. President Kennedy authorized an increase of US military advisers but never sent combat troops. As the situation deteriorated, JFK finally decided the policy was wrong. In October 1963 Kennedy issued National Security Action Memorandum 263 directing US withdrawal to begin in December and be completed by the end of 1965. After JFK’s death, President Johnson reversed course and began sending massive numbers of US soldiers to Vietnam. Twelve years later, after 58,000 American and about two million Vietnamese deaths, the US military departed Vietnam.

The Soviet Union was the largest communist country and primary challenger to the US and capitalist system. The Cold War included mutual recriminations and a huge amount of military spending as both sides designed and produced ever more hydrogen bombs, air and sea delivery systems. During the Cuba crisis, Kennedy and Soviet Premier Khruschev both realized how dangerous the situation was. Nuclear war could have accidentally or intentionally begun. In June1963, JFK delivered the commencement address at American University. It was probably his most important speech yet is little known. JFK called for a dramatic change in US posture, from confrontation to mutual acceptance. He called for re-examination of US attitudes toward peace, the Soviet Union, the Cold War and peace and freedom within the USA itself. He called for a special communication line between Washington and Moscow to allow direct communications between the two leaders. And then Kennedy declared that the US would end nuclear testing as a first step toward general and complete disarmament.

In the last months before his death, JFK opened secret communications with Soviet Premier Khruschev and used a journalist to communicate directly with Fidel Castro. JFK proposed face-to-face talks aimed at reconciliation with Cuba.

Kennedy’s initiatives toward reconciliation and peace were opposed by the CIA and militarist elements in the government. As reported in the NY Times, Kennedy privately told one of his highest officials he “wanted to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds”. Before that could happen, JFK was assassinated, and his policy changes reversed.

From Moscow to Cairo to Jakarta, Kennedy’s death was met with shock and mourning. Leaders in those countries sensed what the assassination meant.

The day after JFK’s funeral, President Johnson supplanted Kennedy’s planned withdrawal from Viet Nam with National Security Action Memorandum 273. This resulted in 12 years of aggression and bloodshed in southeast Asia. Coups were carried out in the Dominican Republic and Indonesia. US resumed support for South African apartheid and Portuguese colonial wars. Assassination attempts on Fidel Castro escalated while military coups took place in numerous Latin American countries. In the Middle East, the US solidified support for Israel and Saudi Arabia.

The author of “JFK and the Unspeakable”, Jim Douglas, writes “President Kennedy’s courageous turn from global war to a strategy of peace provides the why of his assassination. Because he turned toward peace with our enemies, the Communists, he found himself at odds with his own national security state.”

*

Rick Sterling is a journalist based in the SF Bay Area. He can be reached at rsterling1@protonmail.com

January 30, 2021 Posted by | Book Review, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

The Corona Crisis. Is There Light at the End of the Tunnel?

Trapped in the Bowels of “Plato’s Cave”

By Prof. Ruel F. Pepa | Global Research | January 30, 2021

What matters most at this point in time is not the peddled stories of Covid-19’s life-threatening proliferation but rather the enormous effect of those stories in the lives of people whose fear has already evolved into paranoia. This whole situation has likewise led them in a unilateral direction without considering in-depth transcripts of research studies produced on the other side of the fence.

The same people have developed the tendency to ignore the fact that the researchers involved in these studies are competent and distinguished scientists whose expertise is recognized in prestigious academic institutions and professional organizations.

It doesn’t matter anymore how comprehensive and evidence-sustained these studies are. Nobody wants to listen because of the simple reason that people have already been caught in a loop of lies and fear and there is no way out. Well, it is not that there really is no way out; there is, but they are just incorrigibly blinded to the core that such blindness has drawn them away from the way out.

To be more accurate, it could actually be more of an issue of deafness rather than blindness because nobody wants to listen to how they could find the way out. That is the common aftermath of getting brainwashed–all the windows of possibilities are shut off and any attempt to show them the way to unlock such windows is already an exercise in futility.

People have been agonizing in the face of massive economic disempowerment, disenfranchisement and devastation. But no one, except a few, has the will, courage and initiative to stand up and confront the diabolical powers behind this tragic state of affairs. What rules the situation is nothing but paralysis as no one has the guts to break away from the profound deception that what has befallen the globe is an incontrovertible pandemic. No one is able to break away from the widespread lies that have engulfed humanity.

Behind all these is the extensive power of the post-industrial media used to manipulate consciousness and exploit the material conditions from which we have been programmed to draw the meaningfulness of life in the present dispensation.

This is the very “unpleasant place” where humanity is located and as long as we don’t reach that point of realization that this is a “shithole”, no more no less, no redemption is in sight. We are condemned and this condemnation is all for the benefit of the powers that be who are behind this infrastructure of the hell that they created on planet Earth.

Yes, hundreds of thousands are getting infected day in day out. But on what basis?

On the basis of PCR tests conducted all over the world.

Hundreds of thousands are getting infected according to the highly unreliable testing device and procedure.

And mainstream media are always waiting at the sideline to globally disseminate the news of how things are getting worse. In the process, all other diseases–particularly those that affect the respiratory system–have already been expunged; all is Covid-19. Even recorded deaths generally fall under the category of Covid-19.

As critical minds navigate the rough terrain of the infernal landscape created and sustained by the perpetrators behind the manufactured pandemic, we don’t only find people scared to the bones but among them are hardcore “dogmatic” believers who have gone extremely ballistic against all defiant viewpoints aimed to falsify the indoctrination they get from the propagandists of the pandemic lies.

Confronted by this reality, there seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel.

Or is there really a tunnel? Perhaps we are all in the bowels of “Plato’s cave” and the most crucial problem now is the majority just refuse to take the initiative to find the way out.

*

Prof. Ruel F. Pepa is a Filipino philosopher based in Madrid, Spain. A retired academic (Associate Professor IV), he taught Philosophy and Social Sciences for more than fifteen years at Trinity University of Asia, an Anglican university in the Philippines.

January 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

“Sonderkommando Eyewitness” Testimony to the Holocaust

By John Wear | Inconvenient History | Volume 12 (2020) #4

Promoters of the Holocaust story inevitably raise eyewitness testimony as “proof” of the genocide of European Jewry during World War II. A pro-Holocaust supporter told me that witnesses such as Elie Wiesel, Simon Wiesenthal and Viktor Frankl are not relied upon by historians to prove the “Holocaust” happened. Instead, testimony from Sonderkommandos who actually worked at the alleged homicidal gas chambers constitutes the most-reliable eyewitness testimony. A Sonderkommando was an inmate who aided the German camp authorities with disposing of the bodies of inmates who had died in the camps. Many of them were Jews, and all the “eyewitness” testimony comes from Jews, some of whom claim that all Sonderkommando members were Jews.

This article discusses the credibility of several prominent Sonderkommandos mentioned frequently in the pro-Holocaust literature.

Henryk Tauber

Henryk Tauber stated in his deposition of May 1945 that he worked in the crematoria at Birkenau from February 1943 to October 1944. Pro-Holocaust researcher Robert Jan van Pelt refers to Sonderkommando Henryk Tauber as “an almost-ideal witness” and states “we do well to attach the highest evidentiary value” to Tauber’s testimony.[1] Jean-Claude Pressac stated: “The testimony by Henryk Tauber is the best that exists on the Birkenau Krematorien. Being 95% historically reliable, it stands head-and-shoulders above the rest.”[2] An analysis of Tauber’s testimony, however, shows that it is utterly dubious.

Tauber said in his deposition: “Generally speaking, we burned four or five corpses at a time in one muffle, but sometimes we charged a greater number of corpses. It was possible to charge up to eight ‘muselmanns’ [Camp slang for emaciated inmates]. Such big charges were incinerated without the knowledge of the head of the crematorium during air-raid warnings in order to attract the attention of airmen by having a bigger fire emerging from the chimney. We imagined that in that way it might be possible to change our fate.”[3]

As is common knowledge and has been pointed out many times, crematorium chimneys do not emit flames. It is also impossible to push eight corpses into a cremation muffle whose door is just two feet wide and two feet high. And apart from that, before Tauber and his co-workers would have been able to push eight corpses into each muffle and get a huge blaze going, any plane of whose approach they claim to have heard would have long since flown away. Such testimonies are, to use Pressac’s words, “nothing but downright lies and pure invention.”[4]

Tauber testified in his deposition: “During the incineration of such [not-emaciated] corpses, we used the coke only to light the fire of the furnace initially, for fatty corpses burned of their own accord thanks to the combustion of the body fat. On occasion, when coke was in short supply, we would put some straw and wood in the ash bins under the muffles, and once the fat of the corpse began to burn the other corpses would catch light themselves… Later on, as cremations succeeded one another, the furnaces burned thanks to the embers produced by the combustion of the corpses. So, during the incineration of fat bodies, the fires were generally extinguished.”[5]

These claims are false. The thousands of crematories around the world consuming large amounts of energy are the best proof that cremation of bare bodies cannot be started, sustained nor completed from the combustion of body fat from the corpses.[6]

Tauber’s testimony becomes even more afactual when he says that the Birkenau crematories were shut down in 1944 because cremation trenches are more-efficient than crematories. Tauber testified: “It was realized that the pits burned the corpses better (than the furnaces), so the Krematorien closed down one after the other after the pits came into operation.”[7] Germar Rudolf comments on Tauber’s testimony: “As for trench burning in comparison to cremation, the energy loss through radiation and convection, along with the problem of incomplete burning, is so gigantic that further commentary is really not needed.”[8]

Tauber also said in his testimony: “Ober Capo August explained to us that, according to the calculations and plans for this crematorium, five to seven minutes was allowed to burn one corpse in a muffle.”[9] This is impossible even today, and using 1940s technology it took at least an hour to incinerate a corpse. No plan for any actual crematorium indicates otherwise.

Tauber also estimated that 4 million people were gassed at Auschwitz/Birkenau: “During my time in Auschwitz, I was able to talk to various prisoners who had worked in the Krematorien and the Bunkers before my arrival. They told me that I was not among the first to do this work, and that before I came another 2 million people had already been gassed in Bunkers 1 and 2 and Krematorium I. Adding up, the total number of people gassed in Auschwitz amounted to about 4 million.”[10] Today no credited historian estimates that 4 million people were gassed at Auschwitz/Birkenau. Tauber was merely repeating the Soviet propaganda extant at the time.

More Incongruities in Tauber’s Testimony

Henryk Tauber said in his deposition: “The people going to be gassed and those in the gas chamber damaged the electrical installations, tearing the cables out and damaging the ventilation equipment.”[11]

Ventilating the alleged homicidal gas chambers would have been prevented after the ventilation equipment had been damaged by the inmates. If Tauber’s statement was true, the Germans would have had to repair the wiring and ventilation ducts in the gas chambers on a regular basis. Tauber and the other Sonderkommandos would not have been able to clear the gas chambers of dead bodies when the ventilation system was not working. Thus, the daily mass gassings in the homicidal gas chambers could not have occurred as Tauber alleged.[12]

Tauber also stated in his deposition that the Sonderkommandos carried the bodies to the crematorium muffles. Tauber makes no mention that the Sonderkommandos used special protection to carry the bodies.[13] A body that has been killed with hydrocyanic acid (HCN) cannot be safely touched by any person without protection. Dr. Robert Faurisson said in regard to HCN poisoning: “Hydrocyanic acid penetrates into the skin, the mucous membranes, and the bodily fluids. The corpse of a man who has just been killed by this powerful poison is itself a dangerous source of poisoning, and cannot be touched with bare hands. In order to enter the HCN-saturated chamber to remove the corpse, special gear is needed, as well as a gas mask with a special filter.”[14] The danger of touching someone killed with Zyklon B gas is confirmed in the scientific literature.[15]

Bill M. Armontrout, the warden of Missouri State Penitentiary, testified at the 1988 Ernst Zündel trial as to the operation of the Missouri homicidal gas chamber:

After the execution, the ammonia was released and the gas expelled out of the chamber. All staff and witnesses were removed from the area. The ventilation fan ran for approximately an hour before two officers equipped with Scott air-packs (self-contained breathing apparatus which firemen use to enter smoke-filled buildings) opened the hatch of the gas chamber and removed the lead bucket containing the cyanide residue. The two officers wore rubberized disposable clothing and long rubber gloves. They hosed down the condemned man’s body in the chair, paying particular attention to the hair and the clothing because of the cyanide residue, then removed him and placed him on a gurney where further decontamination took place. The officers then hosed the entire inside of the gas chamber with regular cold water.[16]

The Sonderkommandos at Auschwitz/Birkenau would have had to wear something similar to Scott air-packs to remove the dead bodies from the homicidal gas chambers. There is simply no way around it. Otherwise, the alleged homicidal gassing operations would not have worked, and Tauber would not have lived to tell his story.

Tauber stated in his deposition concerning the alleged gas chambers: “The roof of the gas chamber was supported by concrete pillars running down the middle of its length. On either side of these pillars there were four others, two on each side. The sides of these pillars, which went up through the roof, were of heavy wire mesh. Inside this grid, there was another of finer mesh and inside that a third of very fine mesh. Inside this last mesh cage there was a removable can that was pulled out with a wire to recover the pellets from which the gas had evaporated.”[17]

Germar Rudolf writes in regard to Tauber’s testimony: “Several hundred people, locked into a cellar with a very small surface area, anticipating death, would panic and attempt to escape, damaging everything that stood in their way… If these columns actually existed, their outer framework would have to have been of solid steel, but certainly not of fragile wire mesh construction.”[18] Tauber’s testimony concerning wire mesh in the gas chambers is simply not credible.

Abraham and Shlomo Dragon

Brothers Abraham and Shlomo Dragon claim to have been Sonderkommandos stationed at Birkenau. Shlomo recalled his first encounter with dead bodies at a cottage known as Bunker 2: “As [SS officer Otto] Moll opened the door of the house, bodies fell out. We smelled gas. We saw corpses of both sexes. The whole place was full of naked people on top of each other falling out.”[19]

Shlomo Dragon said that the cottage was “a little house with a thatched roof” that served as a gas chamber. When asked how the SS threw the gas into the cottage, Shlomo replied: “There was a little window in the side wall.” Dragon stated that he “could sense the sweetish taste of the gas.” According to Dragon, the Sonderkommandos dragged the bodies out of the alleged gas chamber “by the hands,” and then “threw them into the carts, lugged them to the pits, and threw them into the pits.”[20]

Shlomo Dragon’s testimony is phony for many reasons. First, Dragon claims that the sexes were not separated before entering the alleged gas chambers. This is not credible because:

1) This procedure is contrary to the procedures followed during disinfestation, where according to eyewitnesses the sexes were invariably separated.

2) Since there were always two alleged “gas chambers” of each type available in Birkenau (in Crematorium II and III, or IV and V, or Bunkers I and II), there is no apparent reason why the victims could not have been separated by sex.

3) The claims were repeatedly made that the victims were made to believe that they were going to shower or undergo disinfestation. These procedures would have necessarily separated the populace on the basis of sex, if only because of the need for deception.

4) Particularly in the 1940s, large numbers of people could only have been made to disrobe completely with others of the opposite sex if they had been threatened with force and violence. This would, however, have nullified all the other measures of deception.[21]

Dragon’s statement that he could smell the sweetish taste of the gas also is not credible. Hydrogen-cyanide gas actually smells of bitter almonds. There is nothing “sweetish” about it.[22]

As previously stated, it is also not survivable to enter “gas chambers” and then drag and carry the dead bodies with bare hands with only a gas mask as a protective measure. Germar Rudolf states: “It should not be forgotten here that hydrogen cyanide is a contact poison. Transporting corpses, on whose skin huge, possibly lethal amounts of hydrogen cyanide are absorbed, [would have] required that the special commands dealing with these corpses had to wear protective clothes.”[23]

Dragon’s description of Bunker 2 as a little house with a little window in the side wall where gas was introduced is also not credible. Genuine homicidal gas chambers require advanced engineering and construction. Homicidal gas chambers cannot be made out of existing cottages where poison gas is introduced through a little window in a side wall. Furthermore, no documentary evidence has ever been found indicating that Bunker 2 at Birkenau functioned as an extermination facility.[24]

Shlomo and Abraham Dragon claim they lived to tell their stories only because Shlomo got sick. All the other 200 Sonderkommandos in their group allegedly were transferred to Lublin and gassed. So instead of being gassed, Shlomo stayed at Birkenau, received medical treatment, convinced the SS to keep his brother with him, and both brothers lived to tell their story of mass murder at Birkenau. Like many Holocaust survivors, they both claim to have survived Birkenau through a miracle.[25]

Shlomo Venezia

Shlomo Venezia arrived in Auschwitz/Birkenau on April 11, 1944 and soon began work with the Sonderkommandos.[26] Venezia’s work initially involved carrying bodies removed from Bunker 2 to nearby ditches. Venezia said: “The ditches sloped down, so that, as they burned, the bodies discharged a flow of human fat down the ditch to a corner where a sort of basin had been formed to collect it. When it looked as if the fire might go out, the men had to take some of that liquid fat from the basin, and throw it onto the fire to revive the flames. I saw this only in the ditches of Bunker 2.”[27]

Shlomo Venezia’s story is ludicrous. The ignition temperature of human fats is far lower than the ignition temperature of the light hydrocarbons which form as a result of the gasification of the bodies and of the seasoned wood used in the fire. The human fat is the first thing that burns on a corpse located in a fire. The human fat could not possibly have flowed down to a corner of the ditch as Venezia described—it would all have burned away before it could do so. Also, if by some miracle any human fat had flowed to the corner of the ditch, the Sonderkommandos would have had to collect it from within an immense fire raging with a temperature of at least 600° C. No human being could have withstood such intense heat.[28]

Venezia later worked at Crematorium III in Birkenau. He said that it took about 10 to 12 minutes for the people to be killed by the gas, and another 20 minutes to exhaust the poison gas. Venezia described bringing the corpses out of the gas chamber: “A terrible, acrid smell filled the room. We couldn’t distinguish between what came from the specific smell of the gas and what came from the smell of the people and the human excrement.”[29]

Venezia never mentioned that he used a gas mask during his work. Without a gas mask, Venezia and the other Sonderkommandos would have been killed in turn. The ventilators could not have completely exhausted the gas from the alleged gas chambers in only 20 minutes. More important, there would always have been residues of the toxic gas among the bodies that would be released as they were moved. A gas mask would have been required for the Sonderkommandos to remove the corpses from the homicidal gas chambers without being gassed themselves.[30]

Conclusion

This article documents only a small portion of the absurdities, inconsistencies and outright lies of the testimony of self-styled Sonderkommandos. Similar to other eyewitnesses to the so-called Holocaust, the putative surviving Sonderkommandos have failed to provide credible evidence that Germany built and operated homicidal gas chambers to conduct a program of genocide against European Jewry during World War II.     

Endnotes

[1] Van Pelt, Robert Jan, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial, Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2002, pp. 188, 204-205.

[2] Pressac, Jean-Claude, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, New York: The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, 1989, p. 481. See http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/pressac0481.shtml.

[3] http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=82890.

[4] Rudolf, Germar, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz, Washington, D.C., The Barnes Review, 2011, pp. 188-189.

[5] http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=82890.

[6] Rudolf, Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, 3rd edition, Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2017, p. 456.

[7] http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=82890.

[8] Rudolf, Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust, 2nd edition, Uckfield: Castle Hill Publishers, 2011, p. 387.

[9] http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=82890.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Rudolf, Germar, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2011, pp. 111-112.

[13] http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=82890.

[14] Rudolf, Germar, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2011, pp. 217-218. See also http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n4p14_Faurisson.html.

[15] https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mmg/mmg.asp?id=1141&tid=249.

[16] Kulaszka, Barbara, (ed.), Did Six Million Really Die: Report of Evidence in the Canadian `False News’ Trial of Ernst Zündel, Toronto: Samisdat Publishers Ltd., 1992, p. 352.

[17] http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=82890.

[18] Rudolf, Germar, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz, Washington, D.C., The Barnes Review, 2011, p. 111.

[19] Greif, Gideon, We Wept without Tears: Testimonies of the Jewish Sonderkommando from Auschwitz, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2005, p. 133.

[20] Ibid., pp. 134-136.

[21] Rudolf, Germar, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2011, pp. 204-205.

[22] Mattogno, Carlo, The Bunkers of Auschwitz: Black Propaganda versus History, Chicago: Theses and Dissertations Press, 2004, p. 130. See http://vho.org/dl/ENG/tboa.pdf.

[23] Rudolf, Germar, The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz, Washington, D.C.: The Barnes Review, 2011, p. 218.

[24] Mattogno, Carlo, The Bunkers of Auschwitz: Black Propaganda versus History, Chicago: Theses and Dissertations Press, 2004, p. 48. See http://vho.org/dl/ENG/tboa.pdf.

[25] Greif, Gideon, We Wept without Tears: Testimonies of the Jewish Sonderkommando from Auschwitz, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2005, p. 147.

[26] Veneziz, Shlomo, Inside the Gas Chambers: Eight Months in the Sonderkommando of Auschwitz, Malden, Mass.: Polity Press, 2009, p. xi.

[27] Ibid., pp. 59-60.

[28] Mattogno, Carlo, “The Truth about the Gas Chambers”?, Inconvenient History, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2010.

[29] Veneziz, Shlomo, Inside the Gas Chambers: Eight Months in the Sonderkommando of Auschwitz, Malden, Mass.: Polity Press, 2009, p. 69.

[30] Mattogno, Carlo, “The Truth about the Gas Chambers”?, Inconvenient History, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2010.

January 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

COVID: If there is no virus, why are people dying?

By Jon Rappoport | January 29, 2021

Since the beginning of this false pandemic, I’ve been offering compelling evidence that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists.

Then people ask, “So why are all these people dying?”

I have explained that, many times, and in this article I’ll explain it again.

First of all, the whole notion that COVID-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID IS NOT ONE THING.

This is both the hardest and simplest point to accept and understand.

Don’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is THE cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.”

By far, the biggest sources of illness we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia; flu and flu-like disease; TB; other unnamed lung/respiratory problems.

THESE ARE BEING RELABELED “COVID.” It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.”

Thus, the old is artificially made new. It’s still old.

In this wide-ranging group of people who have traditional lung conditions, by far the largest component is the elderly and frail.

They are dying in nursing homes, in hospitals, in their houses and apartments. In addition to their lung problems, they have been suffering from a whole host of other conditions, for a long time, and they’ve been treated with toxic drugs.

They’re terrified that they might receive a diagnosis of “COVID,” and then they are given that diagnosis. THEN they’re isolated, cut off from friends and family. They give up and die.

This is forced premature death.

Some of these elderly and frail people are heavily sedated and put on breathing ventilators—which is a killing treatment. In a large New York study, it was discovered that patients over the age of 64, who were put on ventilators, died 97.2 % of the time. Staggering.

Some of these elderly and frail patients are now dying from reactions to the COVID vaccine—and of course, their deaths are listed as “COVID.”

Why else are people dying? In many cases, it’s a simple matter of bookkeeping. They die in hospitals for a variety of reasons, and staff write “COVID death” on their files. In the US, states receive federal money based on these statistics.

Let’s say that, in certain places around the world, there are clusters of deaths (being called COVID) that can’t be explained in the ways I’ve just described.

In those situations, you would have to examine EACH situation closely. For example, just prior to an outbreak in Northern Italy, was there a vaccination campaign? What was in the vaccine? A new breed of toxic substances?

You have to consider each cluster independently.

Getting the picture?

None of the “COVID deaths” anywhere in the world requires the existence of a new virus.

For instance, in Wuhan, where the whole business began, the first “COVID” cases of pneumonia occurred in a city whose air is HEAVILY polluted. In China, every year, roughly 300,000 people die from pneumonia. That means millions of cases. None of those deaths need to be explained by invoking a new virus.

Now, add to all this the fact that the PCR test for the virus is irreparably flawed and useless (for a variety of reasons I’ve explained in other articles). The test spits out false-positives like a fire hose. Thus, the high case numbers. If the authorities have to go to such extremes to paint a picture of a spreading viral epidemic…

There is no evidence that an actual germ is traveling around the world felling people. The “evidence” is invented.

The “pandemic” is invented.

The fraud is promoted.

During these fake epidemics (there have been many), someone will say: “But my neighbor’s son, who was very healthy, died suddenly. It must be the virus.”

No. People who appear to be healthy do die. Not just today, but going back in history as far as you want to go. No one has an explanation. They might have an explanation if they looked very closely, but they don’t look closely.

Favoring the “virus explanation” is a bias, a knee-jerk reaction, a response to propaganda.

If you think there must be other major reasons to explain “why all these people are dying,” keep in mind that “lung conditions” is a category that expands all over the globe. For instance, there are about one BILLION cases of flu-like illness EVERY YEAR on planet Earth.

Repackaging/relabeling just a small percentage of those cases alone would account for all official COVID death numbers.

What’s new about COVID is the STORY. That’s what’s being sold: a STORY about a virus.

January 29, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Newspeak in the 21st Century: How to Become a Model Citizen in the New Era of Domestic Warfare

By Cynthia Chung | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 27, 2021

With [proclaimed] President Biden’s inauguration many feel that they can finally breathe a deep sigh of relief. At last sanity has been restored and we can all go back to our predictable lives knowing that the future can only get better during these next four years.

Well… not quite.

There still remains the problem that everybody may not be on board with the progressive changes that Biden’s Administration plans to push through. This, of course, is wholly unacceptable.

Disagreement has become an extremely sensitive issue lately; it was once thought that debate was an essential component to a strong and healthy democracy, however, we are now told that it is extremely dangerous, in fact, it may soon be categorised as a form of domestic terrorism.

As early as mid-Nov 2020, Biden was already discussing the need to pass further laws against domestic terrorism. This is interesting since under the 2001 Patriot Act (which was meant to be a temporary enforcement in reaction to 9/11, however, is still in place 19 years later), domestic terrorism is already defined as;

“activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.”

So, the question begs, what else needs to be added to the Patriot Act, which was recognised at the time of its enforcement as something that should only be temporary since it was understood that it infringed upon civil liberties? Come to think of it, why is the Patriot Act still in place, which allows for the indefinite continuation of human rights violations such as warrantless wiretapping; illegal torture, kidnapping, and detention; mass surveillance; government secrecy; Real ID; no-fly list; political spying; abuse of material witness statutes; and attacks on academic freedom?

As Glenn Greenwald wrote in his formidable paper The New Domestic War on Terror is Coming, “what needs to be criminalized that is not already a crime?”, keeping in mind that as of June 2020, the United States has the highest prisoner rate in the world, followed by El Salvador, Turkmenistan, Thailand and Palau.

Well, the answer is apparently simple and as always for our own good. We have come to a point in time where the enemy is not some radicalized ideology, it is not some foreign despot, it is not even the threat of war (whether it be economic, cyber or nuclear), but rather it is ourselves. We, the people, are the new enemies of the State.

You may protest “Not I! I am a model citizen! I pay my taxes on time, I am never late or call in sick for work, I make sure to be up-to-date with the newest ‘woke’ revelations and I don’t engage with anything outside of the mainstream matrix during my free-time.” People such as yourself think, that when the Biden Administration is calling for tougher laws against domestic terrorism, that it is obviously meant for the ‘other guy,’ those uneducated bigots who are screaming at the top of their lungs “Treason!” and inciting what we are told to be forms of ‘insurrection,’ all in the name of the archaic ideas of ‘patriotism’ and the ‘U.S. Constitution.’

You, unlike so many others, have no problem recognising that the U.S. Constitution is actually part of the problem, that by the standards used today, the U.S. Constitution is itself responsible for ‘inciting violence’ and thus guilty of domestic terrorism, and thus needs to be revoked.

But you see… that’s just not good enough.

Though you are well on your way to becoming a model citizen in the 21st century, you still have a little ways to go. It is for this reason that a guide to 21st century Newspeak has been recently released to make sure that well-intentioned citizens like yourself are fully informed of what is required of you in terms of appropriate behaviour, as well as appropriate thoughts, and though this will take a little more time, appropriate instincts.

21st Century Newspeak

The first alteration that will need to take place is freedom of thought. It has been shown through peer-review studies that individual thoughts are susceptible to forming erroneous beliefs and can lead to dangerous behaviours such as refusal to integrate into a community standard.

Once an individual refuses to integrate into its designated community, it is only a matter of time before this individual shows opposition and even antagonism towards said community. Thus failure to integrate is one of the first signs that an individual is on the path to becoming a domestic terrorist.

Because the individual mind is flawed, it can no longer be trusted to be the standard of its own judgement of what is right and wrong. It is for this reason that we are introducing groupthink. This concept is not new, however, the difference is from now on the individual’s environment will only be allowed to reciprocate the values of groupthink, and all other thoughts outside of groupthink are to be banned and punishable under the new laws.

Even if thoughts outside of groupthink appear as harmless to the collective, they are not, for any thought that is not groupthink threatens to lead to a different outcome than that intended by groupthink and thus is a threat to the security of the collective.

In order to ensure commitment to groupthink, it will be mandatory that every individual engage in at least 2 minutes of Hate every hour throughout the day, every day. This can be achieved either by watching 2 minutes of Hate news, or by engaging in a public 2 minutes of Hate with a colleague, a friend or family member via social media.

It is imperative that an individual watch the 15 minute morning and evening “What to Hate” news provided by the Ministry of Truth (or Minitrue), in order to be the most up-to-date with what are the ongoing and new subjects of Hate, and what were previous subjects of Hate which are no longer deemed to be subjects of Hate.

It is most important that an individual never refer to a former subject of Hate as such. Any present subject of Hate must be seen as having always been a subject of Hate and any former subject of Hate must be seen as having never been a subject of Hate.

This may appear as an impossible task, but we assure you it is entirely possible with the use of doublethink, which many of you have already been practising. Doublethink requires that one be both conscious and unconscious of the fact that they are telling deliberate lies while genuinely believing them; to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies. This makes up a part of our new Party slogan: FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.

Those who excel the most in doublethink will receive the highest stations within our newly organised community, as safe-guards against the renegade, the domestic terrorist.

Another alteration that will need to occur is how we think and refer to the past and the future. With the newly enforced groupthink, the present is what groupthink dictates it to be, which is subject to change, however, must be regarded as having always been.

The past is what the present dictates it to be, if it were not, it could challenge the basis for the present. Thus to preserve the present, the past must serve the present, only justifying why we Hate what we presently Hate and why we Love what we presently Love and can do nothing to contradict these Party lines. There will be permitted no records of an alternative past, there will be no way to prove that the past was ever different from what the present dictates it to be, the only threat to this narrative is the record of the individual mind, and once this ceases to be there will only be the Minitrue record as the recorder of past Truth.

In effect, the model citizen will perceive the past as dead and the future as unimaginable. The future is unimaginable because it is impossible to think of an alternative to the present, in fact, the mere act of thinking of an alternative to the present is considered a challenge to the status quo of the present, and thus is a challenge to groupthink, and thus is a form of domestic terrorism, which we will call from now on thoughtcrime.

Thoughtcrime is essentially any thought pertaining to memory, judgement of right and wrong, thoughts of an alternative reality, and self-reflection, which are now all deemed forms of thoughtcrime. If an individual is to engage in any of these sorts of thoughts, it is only a matter of time before they will come into conflict with groupthink and the Party line, thus private thoughts are banned and punished under the new laws.

It may seem an impossible task at first not to engage in private thoughts, but again, we assure you it is entirely possible using crimestopCrimestop is the practice of not grasping analogies, failing to perceive logical errors, misunderstanding the simplest arguments, of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop is essentially, protective stupidity.

It is imperative that one practice crimestop during any interaction with another individual, however, it is also imperative that one practice crimestop within their own inner-dialogue, such that even from your own conscience you will be protected from committing a thoughtcrime.

Newspeak will also help dissuade from thoughtcrimeNewspeak is to be the new acceptable vocabulary, anything that references words outside of the most-up-to-date edition of the Newspeak dictionary will be considered Oldspeak and something to be construed as counter to groupthink. It is understood that by reducing the vocabulary to revolve around a few words such as good; which for example can be used as plusgood, doubleplusgood, ungood etc, it will serve to narrow the range of thought an individual is capable of, and thus reduce the capability of committing a thoughtcrime. How wonderful! That in the future we will be unable to commit crime for we will be incapable of its thought! This makes up another part of our new Party slogan: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

In terms of the new laws, in effect, nothing will change. Unacceptable behaviours and thoughts will not be designated as illegal per se; one reason for this is because we do not plan on having any public trials. Anyone who is in violation of conduct will simply be removed either temporarily into a “re-education facility” or will be vaporised. Any subject that has been vaporised will be removed from the collective memory records and can never be referred to as having ever existed.

The reason why no public trials will be held from now on is because, as we have seen, dissent is infectious. Thus, holding public trials risk further encouragement towards dissent. It is for this reason that dissenters must be removed swiftly and quietly in the middle of the night. Such disappearances will occur relatively regularly and will eventually become the new normal, however, it will not be traumatic for the collective. The subject will simply cease to exist as if it were all just a dream, the structure of our daily routine unaffected.

In order to ensure utmost compliance, the collective will be employing the use of children spies, this has already been occurring abroad, and proves to be very effective.

Purges and vaporizations will be a necessary part of the government mechanics and will become the new normal. We have already discussed the necessity for vaporizations, as for the necessity of purges, it is because the community will be built so as to remain in stasis, however, this can only be accomplished through artificial means, for it is not natural that a thing remain the same but rather that it either improves or deteriorates.

However, in order for the Party to maintain absolute control, there can be no change to the present except for that chosen by the Party, thus any change is a challenge to the Party. In order to facilitate an artificial environment of no change, resources must artificially be kept low, and purges need to occur so that this environment of scarcity is tightly controlled and maintained.

In order for us to achieve this, our economy will have to go through stagnation, we will need to decrease the amount of land used for cultivation, we will no longer add capital equipment needed for industrial growth and great blocks of the population will be prevented from working and will be kept half alive by State charity. The wheels of industry cannot be allowed to turn so as to increase the real wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed, and in practice the only way of achieving this is by continuous warfare.

War will continue under the Old Cold War doctrine. War will always be present, and yet will never be seen by the majority of our citizens, the reason for this being that war will not be about a real threat to security nor about real conquests but rather will be about maintaining the present status quo by exhausting the surplus of consumable goods, while also helping to preserve the special mental atmosphere that a hierarchical society needs.

However, real war will be purely an internal affair, the war waged by the ruling group against its own subjects, with the object of the war as to keep the structure of society intact and unchanging.

A peace that is truly permanent under this new ideology is no different than an invisible permanent war. For peace in our new era will equate to stability through no change. This makes up our first Party slogan: WAR IS PEACE.

Conclusion

All of these means are necessary if we are to realise that the only secure basis for oligarchy is collectivism, and that oligarchy is the only means to achieving peace, freedom and strength for the collective.

However, we are still very far from this ideal and there is much that threatens its becoming, namely, the masses, or what we call the proles. So long as the masses believe that they are entitled to freedom of thought, our endeavours cannot succeed.

The individual must voluntarily relinquish this. It cannot be taken from them no matter the degree of control and no matter the threat of physical harm. An individual’s mind is theirs and cannot be taken, instead, the individual must be led to believe that it is in their best interest to relinquish their mind.

Let us do our best then to convince the individual that they are no longer fit to use their mind and let us pray that we are successful, for if we fail, our entire system of control fails with it.

“You would not make the act of submission which is the price of sanity…Reality exists only in the human mind, nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party.” – O’Brien in George Orwell’s “1984”

January 29, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Morley v. CIA

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | January 27, 2021

After the end of World War II, the U.S. national-security establishment convinced the American people that there existed an international communist conspiracy to take over the United States and the rest of the world. This supposed conspiracy, U.S. officials steadfastly maintained, was based in Moscow, Russia. During the Cold War, the tentacles of this supposed conspiracy spread to China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Cuba, Iran, Guatemala, Chile, and other places around the world, including the United States. The Reds, they said, were everywhere and were coming to get us.

This supposed threat of communism, in fact, is what motivated U.S. officials to convert the federal government into a national-security state, a totalitarian type of governmental structure in which officials wield omnipotent powers, such as assassination. It also motivated U.S. officials to intervene in the civil wars in Korea and Vietnam, which killed more than 100,000 U.S. soldiers, many of whom had been conscripted to “serve.” The Pentagon and the CIA maintained that if the communists weren’t stopped over there, they would soon be in the halls of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court, not to mention the public schools, running the country over here.

Thus, for an American few things could be considered worse than to be labeled a communist. People who were suspected of being communists were fired from their jobs, ostracized, and sometimes criminally prosecuted. Recall the McCarthy hearings, when many people’s lives were destroyed simply through the government’s asking the question, “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” Recall the Hollywood Blacklist and the criminal prosecution of Hollywood writer Dalton Trumbo and the Hollywood Ten. Recall the spying on and blackmail of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, who U.S. officials suspected of being a communist.

Immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy, the word went out that he had been killed by a communist, a young former U.S. Marine named Lee Harvey Oswald. The very first organization to begin publicizing Oswald’s communist bona fides was an anti-Castro exile group in New Orleans called the DRE, which immediately sent out a press release announcing that Oswald was a communist. The publicity was highly effective in dissuading people, especially people on the left, from questioning the official narrative of the assassination — that Kennedy had been killed by a communist. People were scared to death that if they questioned the official narrative, they would be labeled communists or communist sympathizers.

What people did not know at the time — and what they would not discover for several decades — was that the DRE was being secretly funded and directed by the CIA. The CIA’s supervising officer for the DRE was a man named George Joannides.

In the late 1990s, former Washington Post reporter Jefferson Morley uncovered Joannides’ role in the DRE back in 1963 and began requesting the CIA for its files on Joannides. The CIA steadfastly refused to comply with Morley’s request and made it clear that it would never disclose most of Joannides’s secret activities.

Morley filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit against the CIA, which, owing to the massive resistance of the CIA, lasted for years. The fascinating story of Morley’s battle against CIA secrecy on Joannides is now told in FFF’s newest book, Morley v. CIA: My Unfinished JFK Investigation, which is available in Kindle format on Amazon for $1.

In the course of his investigation and litigation, Morley uncovered some fascinating and intriguing facts about Joannides. In the 1970s, the House Select Committee on Assassinations reopened the investigation into the Kennedy assassination. When committee attorneys began seeking too many documents relating to Oswald’s trip to Mexico City, the CIA called Joannides out of retirement, ostensibly to serve as a facilitator between the House committee and the CIA.

As it turned out, however, Joannides’s real role was to serve as an obstructor to the efforts by the House committee attorneys to securing JFK-assassination-related information from the CIA, including information relating to Oswald’s trip to Mexico City. In the process, Joannides and the CIA failed to disclose his role with the DRE in the months leading up to the assassination, just as they had failed to disclose it to the Warren Commission back in 1964.

During the term of the Assassination Records Review Board, Joannides and the CIA once again failed to disclose his pre-assassination relationship to the DRE. Former House Select Committee counsel Robert Blakey later accused the CIA of obstruction of justice, which is a felony. Judge John Tunheim, who chaired the ARRB, declared that “the Agency should come completely clean.”

But the CIA refused to come clean on Joannides, as detailed in Morley’s fascinating account of his long judicial fight against the CIA.

Morley is the author of another book published by FFF: CIA & JFK: The Secret Assassination Files. He will be delivering two presentations at FFF’s upcoming online weekly conference series “JFK’s Foreign Policy and the Assassination.”

The conference series will begin on Wednesday, March 3, and continue weekly on Wednesdays through April 21. Registrations will open next month. Admission will be free.

January 29, 2021 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Deception, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Bright Green Impossibilities

By Willis Eschenbach | Watts Up With That? | January 27, 2021

After reading some information at Friends of Science, I got to thinking about how impossible it will be for us to do what so many people are demanding that we do. This is to go to zero CO2 emissions by 2050 by getting off of fossil fuels.

So let’s take a look at the size of the problem. People generally have little idea just how much energy we get from fossil fuels. Figure 1 shows the global annual total and fossil energy consumption from 1880 to 2019, and extensions of both trends to the year 2050. I note that my rough estimate of 2050 total annual energy consumption (241 petawatt-hrs/year) is quite close to the World Energy Organization’s business-as-usual 2050 estimate of 244 PWhr/yr.

Figure 1. Primary energy consumption, 1880-2019 and extrapolation to 2050. A “petawatt-hour” is 1015 watt-hours

So if we are going to zero emissions by 2050, we will need to replace about 193 petawatt-hours (1015 watt-hours) of fossil fuel energy per year. Since there are 8,766 hours in a year, we need to build and install about 193 PWhrs/year divided by 8766 hrs/year ≈ 22 terawatts (TW, or 1012 watts) of energy generating capacity.

Starting from today, January 25, 2021, there are 10,568 days until January 1, 2050. So we need to install, test, commission, and add to the grid about 22 TW / 10568 days ≈ 2.1 gigawatts/day (GW/day, or 109 watts/day) of generating capacity each and every day from now until 2050.

We can do that in a couple of ways. We could go all nuclear. In that case, we’d need to build, commission, and bring on-line a brand-new 2.1 GW nuclear power plant every single day from now until 2050. Easy, right? …

Don’t like nukes? Well, we could use wind power. Now, the wind doesn’t blow all the time. Typical wind “capacity factor”, the percentage of actual energy generated compared to the nameplate capacity, is about 35%. So we’d have to build, install, commission and bring online just under 3,000 medium-sized (2 megawatt, MW = 106 watts) wind turbines every single day from now until 2050. No problemo, right? …

Don’t like wind? Well, we could use solar. Per the NREL, actual delivery from grid-scale solar panel installations on a 24/7/365 basis is on the order of 8.3 watts per square metre depending on location. So we’d have to cover ≈ 96 square miles (250 square kilometres) with solar panels, wire them up, test them, and connect them to the grid every single day from now until 2050. Child’s play, right? …

Of course, if we go with wind or solar, they are highly intermittent sources. So we’d still need somewhere between 50% – 90% of the total generating capacity in nuclear, for the all-too-frequent times when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing.

To summarize: to get the world to zero emissions by 2050, our options are to build, commission, and bring on-line either:

 One 2.1 gigawatt (GW, 109 watts) nuclear power plant each and every day until 2050, OR

 3000 two-megawatt (MW, 106 watts) wind turbines each and every day until 2050 plus a 2.1 GW nuclear power plant every day and a half until 2050, assuming there’s not one turbine failure for any reason, OR

 96 square miles (250 square kilometres) of solar panels each and every day until 2050 plus a 2.1 GW nuclear power plant every day and a half until 2050, assuming not one of the panels fails or is destroyed by hail or wind.

I sincerely hope that everyone can see that any of those alternatives are not just impossible. They are pie-in-the-sky, flying unicorns, bull-goose looney impossible.

Finally, the US consumes about one-sixth of the total global fossil energy. So for the US to get to zero fossil fuel by 2050, just divide all the above figures by six … and they are still flying unicorn, bull-goose looney impossible.

Math. Don’t leave home without it.

My very best wishes to everyone, stay safe in these parlous times,

w.

PS—As always, to avoid misunderstandings I request that when you comment, you quote the exact words that you are discussing so we can all be clear about who and what you are referring to.

Technical Note: These figures are conservative because they do not include the energy required to build the reactors, wind turbines, or solar panels. This is relatively small per GW of generation for nuclear reactors but is much larger for wind and solar.

They also don’t include the fact that wind turbines have about a 20-year lifespan, so after 20 years we’ll have to double the turbine construction per day. And with solar the lifespan is about 25 years, so for the last five years, we’ll have to double the solar construction per day. And then we will have to decommission and dispose of hundreds of thousands of wind turbines and square miles of solar panels …

The figures also don’t include the fact that if we go to an all-electric economy we will have to completely revamp, extend, and upgrade our existing electrical grid, which will require a huge investment of time, money, and energy.

They also don’t include the cost. The nuclear plants alone will cost on the order of US$170 trillion at current prices. And wind or solar plus 75% nuclear will be on the order of US275 trillion, plus decomissioning and disposal costs for wind turbines and solar panels.

So it is even more impossible … speaking of which, is it possible to be more impossible?

Because if it is possible … this is it.

January 28, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

A trillion-pound dawk klunk

Climate Discussion Nexus | January 27, 2021

Speaking of the obvious and logical, it somehow badly embarrassed the British government this week that they were ordered to release their calculations of the cost of achieving net zero by 2050. Not because the cost is large, though it certainly is. Nor because the calculations might well have shown the costs vastly to exceed the benefits, had there been any calculations. But because behind all the ponderous fog about ‘experts say’, ‘following the science’ and so forth, it seems it may well have been just a wild guess someone stuffed into an email on the fly.

The starting point to this multi-layered embarrassment is that two years ago a warning from then Chancellor of the Exchequer to then PM Theresa May said net zero by 2050 would cost over a trillion pounds. Which is a lot even for a wealthy society such as Britain, whose pre-pandemic GDP was nearly £3 trillion per year, and also embarrassing, though only because a lot of fools were going about saying fossil fuels really weren’t much good anyway and chucking them would probably make us all richer. We’d all just switch to high-paying, high-tech, high-virtue-signalling jobs in the green energy sector or possibly government PR departments.

People are still making such claims, of course, with as little foundation in economics as in science. And as an aside we think it is not a clever PR strategy because once they are in a position to attempt to implement their plans, which Boris Johnson is, along with Justin Trudeau and now Joe Biden, people will quickly discover that they were fools, rogues or both to say abandoning the energy foundations of our civilization would actually make us richer, and being unmasked as a knave or a dunce is a damaging blow to your credibility.

Speaking of dunces, the looming embarrassment in the UK now is that the calculations themselves were apparently done on a napkin or a Post-it… if even that. We have yet to acquire the actual scrap of paper, digital or otherwise. But evidently the Treasury initially refused to release them on the grounds that they were “internal communications”, which sounds like an evasion since it is very hard to understand what else a discussion within a government branch might be. And it has now been backed into confessing that “communications” wasn’t quite the right word since there was just one email. Not a big long study or discussions back and forth. Someone just guessed and fired it off.

This happy-go-lucky approach is especially awkward because governments in the free world have a habit of justifying any policy or reversal of same, and shaming dissenters into the bargain, by insisting that they were following the science, a variant of the “experts say” meme news organizations now plaster on anything they want you to swallow whole. These politicians don’t tell you what the science said or which science said it, and in many cases their high school transcript would not justify faith in their capacity to understand anything science did say. They rarely even tell you who the scientists are beyond one convenient figurehead gifted with charisma or incomprehensibility.

We don’t only mean on climate, or the pandemic. When it comes to “economic science” their general tone is that a laboratory full of people running a computer that makes Deep Thought look like an abacus did a simulation you chumps couldn’t begin to understand that proves that whatever we were planning to do anyway is a brilliant idea.

Government budgets typically now run to hundreds of pages, full of charts and projections as well as electioneering prose, all of it designed to dazzle and intimidate. You are meant to think it was all done with careful attention to counterfactuals, margins of error, limitations on data, uncertainty about external shocks and so on. But it wasn’t. They had the verdict in hand before they began the trial. No government ever went to the boffins and said analyze our plan and were told it’s no good and put that verdict in the document. And on climate economics, the British government apparently deep-sixed the vital “Social Cost of Carbon” because it was too low to justify going nuts on emissions which, characteristically, the government had decided to do before looking at the science, so it then demanded science to justify a decision that, if it is not based on science, is very hard to see what it is based on.

So there’s something fishy about the expertise even when it’s real. But what if it’s not? What if there was no science or in this case no economic science? If it turns out the UK gambled its future on a few scribbles instead of a massive, dense wall of functions, it will cause red faces.

Of course no such thing could happen here in Canada. But only because no government would ever be forced to disclose the basis of its calculations, on the off chance there even were any.

January 28, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

US attempts to destabilize region through supporting terrorism: Iraqi MP

Press TV – January 26, 2021

An Iraqi legislator has warned against the Unites States’ attempts to disrupt peace and security in the Middle East through supporting terrorism, saying Washington is even ready to set entire Iraq on fire so it can keep its military forces in the Arab country.

Karim Alaiwi, a legislator from the Fatah (Conquest) alliance and a member of the Security and Defense Committee in the Iraqi legislature, told Arabic-language Baghdad Today warned against the policies of new US President Joe Biden towards Iraq, reminding the government that Daesh terrorists started their activities during the reign of Democrats.

“The Daesh terror group became active during the former and current presidencies of the [US] Democratic Party. Washington’s policy is to disrupt security and stability in the Middle East, especially in Iraq,” Alaiwi said.

He added, “The United States has supported and financially sponsored most of terrorist operations in Iraq, and has protected leaders of the Daesh terrorist group in many parts of the country.”

The Iraqi lawmaker highlighted that there are areas in Iraq where Daesh is still active, saying Washington is preventing military flights over those regions.

Washington, he said, is ready to “burn” all of Iraq so it will have a pretext to prolong its military presence in the Arab country.

Daesh has claimed responsibility for a rare twin bombing attack that tore through a busy area of central Baghdad on January 21, killing at least 32 people and wounding 110 others.

Yahya Rasool, the spokesman for the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, said one of the two bombers lured a crowd of people towards him in a market in the central Tayaran Square by feigning illness, only to detonate his explosives.

The second bomber struck as people helped victims of the first attack, Rasool added.

Iraq declared victory over Daesh in December 2017 after a three-year counter-terrorism military campaign.

The terror outfit’s remnants, though, keep staging sporadic attacks across Iraq, attempting to regroup and unleash a new era of violence.

Daesh has intensified its terrorist attacks in Iraq since January 2020, when the United States assassinated top Iranian anti-terror commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), along with their companions in a drone strike authorized by former US president Donald Trump near Baghdad International Airport.

Following the assassinations, the Iraqi parliament approved a bill demanding the withdrawal of all foreign military forces led by the United States from the country.

The US began the drawdown under the administration of ex-president Donald Trump, but it has said a number of troops will remain in the Arab country.

January 26, 2021 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment