(David Dees was a visionary. Although he died just over a year ago, he could clearly see what was coming.) “These are no ordinary times.What was inconceivable pre-2020 is today’s reality. What’s going on should terrify everyone paying attention.The scourge of toxic covid mass-jabbing for social control and depopulation on an unparalleled scale exceeds the worst of what Orwell and Huxley could have imagined.”
The nation I grew up in long ago hasn’t existed throughout much of my adult lifetime. Notably post-9/11 and especially since early last year — after seasonal flu was deceptively renamed covid with diabolical aims in mind — US/Western war on humanity went far beyond where their earlier regimes hadn’t dare go before. Not only are US and other Western nations unsafe and unfit to live in, their ruling regimes represent an unprecedented threat to their people and humanity overall. Are US-led Western regimes on the cusp of mandating toxic covid jabs designed to destroy health, shorten lifespans, and kill maximum numbers of people worldwide? US federal law prohibits mandated use of vaccines and other drugs unapproved by the Pharma-controlled FDA. US/Western emergency use authorization never should have been OK’d for unsafe, experimental, fast-tracked, inadequately tested, toxic covid mRNA drugs and vaccines — notably when no emergency exists.
In defiance of federal law and protecting what’s too precious to lose, hundreds of US colleges and universities now mandate toxic covid jabs for students and staff. Unthinkable not long ago, US higher education today risks harm to health and well-being of everyone on growing numbers of college campuses. On May 28, a US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) press release said the following: “Federal EEO laws do not prevent an employer from requiring all employees physically entering the workplace to be” jabbed for covid. In defiance of federal law as explained above, the EEOC supports toxic mass-jabbing as long as not in violation of “ADA (provisions) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other EEO considerations.” EEOC guidance breached federal law — the Nuremberg Code as well that requires voluntary consent on all things related to health. Growing numbers of employers require staff to be covid-jabbed. The same goes for increasing numbers of hospitals and municipalities. On June 23, San Francisco became the largest US municipality to mandate covid jabs for city workers. Refusniks risk termination. The city’s human resources department said the following: City workers are required to report “their vaccination status…no later than July 29.” If covid-jabbed, they must provide documented proof. They must be jabbed “no later than 10 weeks after” FDA approval of at least one covid drug — what most likely is coming, perhaps before summer’s end or early fall. Emergency use authorization alone exists today — despite hazards to health when covid jabs are taken as directed. Growing numbers of US municipalities most likley will follow SF’s bad example. Will growing numbers of business establishments, commercial spaces, other public venues, and perhaps residential buildings follow suit? Will refusniks be ostracized from US and other Western societies for good health practices to stay safe? According to Newsweek, so-called US “health experts” urged the Biden regime “to promote (covid mass-jabbing) orders and passports — on the phoney pretext of protecting public health toxic covid drugs destroy. In California, virtual covid police are reportedly looking for and pressuring covid mass-jabbing refusniks to self-inflict harm. Last week in Atlanta, unelected Kamala Harris called for “volunteers” to knock on doors and harass refusniks to get jabbed. She, Biden, their families, other senior regime officials and their family won’t touch toxic covid jabs they’re pushing ordinary Americans to take. The same goes for at least most privileged individuals in the US and West — knowing toxic covid jabs risk irreversible harm or death near-or-longer-term if jabbed.——————————-VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Stephen Lendman —“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”
God commands that we FLEE fornication, because it is a sin against one’s own body (1 Corinthians 6:18). It’s vitally important to teach your daughters to remain sexually pure until marriage. I have written about this before. Today, I am going to teach you how to teach your sons to flee from harlots. There are many these days. Feminism has turned women into harlots.
First, you must help them to hide God’s Word in their hearts, so that they will not sin against Him (Psalm 119:11). Then, read and study the first seven chapters of Proverbs with them. I am going to zero in on chapter seven.
“And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of an harlot, and subtil of heart. She is loud and stubborn; her feet abide not in her house: Now is she without, now in the streets, and lieth in wait at every corner” (Proverbs 7:10-12). Teach your sons to beware of those women who dress like harlots. They love to show off their bodies. They wear tight and revealing clothing in order to entice men. Encourage them to find a woman who is modest and is only willing to show her body to her husband.
Harlots are those who are subtil of heart. Their goal is to manipulate and deceive unsuspecting men. They are sly, cunning, and crafty like Satan was with Eve. Their intent is to cause destruction in men’s lives. Sex doesn’t only ruin women’s lives. It ruins men’s lives too.
She is loud. She is the opposite of having a meek and quiet spirit. She demands her rights. She wants what she wants when she wants it regardless of the consequences. She’s selfish and makes her foolish desires known unto all.
She is stubborn. She refuses to listen to truth. She is always learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth (2 Timothy 3:7). She loves to have her ears tickled. She mocks and ridicules those who teach and love Truth. She is a hater and despiser of God and everything good.
She never wants to be home where she belongs. She’s out and about. She goes to the bars, gets drunk, and fornicates with men freely. She has a career and entices men in her workplace. She is flirty and acts innocent but on the inside, she is dark and wicked.
“With her much fair speech she caused him to yield, with the flattering of her lips she forced him” (Proverbs 7:21) With her lies, deceit, and flirtatious mannerism, she tricks men into fornicating with her. She falsely believes that this is empowering to her, but it only causes destruction. She doesn’t mind destroying marriages and families. Life is all about her and her pleasures. Her heart is hardened, and she is continually led by the father of lies, Satan, to do his will which is to kill, steal, and destroy.
“Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death” (Proverbs 31:27). Yes, she will take them right down to the pit of hell with her.
If your sons are taught these things while growing up, they will grow up to be men of wisdom and flee this destruction. Tell them that porn does the same thing. All of the women in porn are harlots waiting to entice and destroy men. Satan’s goal is to destroy men and masculinity; for if he can do this, he can destroy nations as we are witnessing today.
Then, teach your sons Proverbs 31 and the kind of woman they should be saving themselves for and seeking. It will be worth it! God’s ways are perfect. Drill this into their hearts and minds from the time they are young. Just as you set rules and boundaries for your children, God has set them for us too.
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. Romans 12:1,2
Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed — not ‘deconstructed’ but destroyed. Noel Ignatiev in his journal Race Traitor
The open pursuance of ‘Whiteness Studies’ must be perceived as nothing less than an act of extreme, even violent, aggression against the White race. Andrew Joyce on Whiteness Studies
To be effective, social engineering cannot be perceived. Michael Jones in Logos Rising
Earlier this year, my brother suddenly asked me what “Critical Race Theory” was. I was elated, for this was proof that this pernicious, genocidal, anti-White theory was finally entering into the consciousness of Whites. Since my brother asked me, stories about Critical Race Theory (CRT) have mushroomed, including much criticism of this previously arcane intellectual trend.
Much to my amazement, however, I’ve noticed that few if any critics of CRT have associated the theory with Jewish ethnic activism.
Though the theory has long been employed in university settings, more recently it has turned up in government and corporate offices, and even the military has been pushing it since the inauguration of Joe Biden as President. For me, it’s long been a given that CRT is linked to the social engineering of our “hostile elite,” which in the context of The Occidental Observer means powerful Jews and Jewish organizations who rule over America and much of The West. When viewed more broadly, however, the topic of CRT has in fact been much addressed by our writers but often under a consideration of something called “Whiteness Studies.” In that sense, I’m merely adding the term “Critical Race Theory” to an ongoing conversation about Jewish ethnic war on Whites.
For me, CRT fits squarely into the mold of Kevin MacDonald’s “Culture of Critique” category in which Jewish “gurus” concoct a Talmudic verbal assault whose main goal is the further destruction of Gentiles — literally. I know because I had a ringside seat to the introduction of CRT in the graduate schools of the 1990s, with one of the most vicious practitioners of the “art” as one of my required professors. It was a brutal experience, but at least I was forced to reckon with it from then on and have since probed more and more deeply into its Jewish roots. In that sense, I’ve gained from the trauma I experienced and emerged out the other end able to share with my audience the lessons I’ve learned.
To tell this story, let’s begin with a now obscure Australian writer named Robert Hughes (1938 – 2012), who was once described as “the most famous art critic in the world.” In 1993, he’d gotten so fed up with identity politics that he penned the book Culture of Complaint: The Fraying of America (Oxford University Press). In this book, he rightly skewered the growth of the Grievance Industry, giving example after example of how black groups or women’s groups or whatever loudly attacked the White Majority for all manner of sins. I recall how his book attracted attention from many of the print journals of the time, with many taking the Australian author’s side, so bad had this “culture of complaint” become.
What frustrated me, however, was the fact that Hughes completely neglected to address the “meta-complaint” in the West from which all lesser complaints emerged. To wit, Hughes failed to see how The Holocaust Narrative had been so successful in advancing Jewish interests that naturally other groups eagerly imitated this successful model.
Of course in 1993 the Complaint Industry was just hitting its stride and I soon endured the “graduate education” described above, with mere complaint being elevated to something far more pernicious and menacing. In any case, the direction of complaint was always the same: Against the White race.
I eventually staggered out of higher education, badly bruised and emotionally scarred, but with terminal degree in hand. Sturdier souls might have crowed that “Whatever doesn’t kill me only makes me stronger,” but I’ve been too battered since to engage in such braggadocio. Instead I try to keep my head down and stoically soldier on. Jews are playing for keeps in this battle.
Fast forward a few years when I was diligently working on a major composition about Jewish power in America and a professor of history with a Harvard Ph.D. twice encouraged me to “give the work of Kevin MacDonald a fair hearing.” I did and the experience has been life changing. His trilogy, culminating in The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, appeared to me at just the right time; I was ready to truly hear what the master had to say.
Of course I immediately recognized the similarity of main titles between Hughes’ “Culture of Complaint” and MacDonald’s “Culture of Critique,” but fortunately the latter’s laser-like focus on Jews made MacDonald’s book far more important than Hughes’. Verily, if Whites ever come out of the ethnic battle described by MacDonald, The Culture of Critique will be among the top books in the new Western pantheon. Future generations of Whites will know the name “Kevin MacDonald” as household words, as well they should.
Here, I am assuming our audience knows the gist of Culture of Critique, as well as the later Cultural Insurrections, so I’m going to now jump to the founding of MacDonald’s Occidental Observer, the online blog which emerged from The Occidental Quarterly, our side’s academic journal. Early on, in 2008, MacDonald published a blog called “Promoting genocide of Whites? Noel Ignatiev and the Culture of Western Suicide” in which he parsed the wordplay used by the late Jewish professor from Harvard to reveal its genocidal intentions toward Whites. Ignatiev was the founder of the journal Race Traitor, the motto of which is “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity,” a phrase which immediate recalls Jewess Susan Sontag’s infamous lines “The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don’t redeem what this particular civilisation has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history …”
Situating Ignatiev’s clever use of words in the category of Jewish ideologies deconstructed in Culture of Critique, MacDonald wrote,
Our interpretation is that Ignatiev’s views are nothing more than ethnic competition. As a leftist Jew, he is part of a long tradition that has opposed white interests and identity — the culture of critiquethat has become the culture of Western suicide. And like so many strongly identified Jews, his hatred for the people and culture of the West comes shining through.
Further falling back on categories included in Culture of Critique, MacDonald concluded that
Ignatiev is just another Jewish intellectual in a long line that stretches back to Franz Boas, the Frankfurt School, and myriad others who now dominate the culture of Western suicide. He may call himself a race traitor, but there is every reason to believe that he has a sense of allegiance to his own people and the long history of hostility to the people and culture of the West that is so typical of highly committed Jews. For him, being a race traitor comes easily and naturally; it’s the mother’s milk of socialization as a Jew.
As fate would have it, the Jewish professor who so tormented me and other Whites in grad school had many similarities to Ignatiev, beginning with appearance:
And what MacDonald wrote about Ignatiev — “People like Ignatiev, who doubtless have a strong sense of their own ethnic identity and interests, have managed to pathologize any sense of ethnic identity and interests among Europeans and European-derived peoples — and no one else” — was true in spades of my graduate school oppressor. What we were exposed to in the 90s is identical to what various critics of Critical Race Theory are describing now — the struggle sessions, the mandatory lectures on “White privilege,” and the complete lack of debate or discussion. I had to watch as our esteemed professor subjected White individuals to withering criticism in class, first reducing a young woman to tears, then much to my disgust, a fellow White male grad student. It was awful.
While MacDonald did not use the phrase “Critical Race Theory” to label Ignatiev’s assault, he was in fact describing the same thing. Best, MacDonald saw through Ignatiev’s sophism to expose the real intent, something which others on TOO have done since, as we shall soon see. Before addressing that, however, I’d like to add an aside whose timing is too good to ignore. As I was about to embark on my dissertation after having completing coursework and exams, another Jewish professor gave me a book he had received gratis in the chance that he might review it. The professor opted not to and gave me the fresh copy:
Written in 1997 by law professor Stephen M. Feldman, the book was titled Please Don’t Wish Me a Merry Christmas: A Critical History of the Separation of Church and State (NYU Press). The subtitle containing “Critical History” points to the fact that the sponsor of the book was the Critical America Series from NYU Press, whose myriad titles revealed by the link can be enjoyed at readers’ leisure. Oh, I should mention that the very first words of the Introduction are: “I am Jewish.” Thus began another “culture of critique” attack on Western man and his major holiday.
Andrew Joyce on “Whiteness Studies”
The Occidental Observer was extremely fortunate to attract the considerable writing skills of Andrew Joyce, beginning with his Limerick “pogrom”: Creating Jewish victimhood, posted on St. Patrick’s Day in 2012. By 2015, however, he had written what can be seen as an extension of MacDonald’s 2008 unpacking of Ignatiev’s brutal intellectual campaign. In “Jews, Communists and Genocidal Hate in ‘Whiteness Studies,’” Joyce drew on MacDonald to show that “Ignatiev only very thinly disguised the unrestrained hatred that his ‘discipline’ incites against Whites and their culture.” Further quoting MacDonald, Joyce noted that
Ignatiev et al. have developed a story that goes as follows: A bunch of very bad people got together and created a category called “white” to which they belong but people with different colored skin can’t belong. Then they made laws that favored people in the white category, they colluded with other whites to dominate the economic and political process, and they invented baseless scientific theories in which whiteness had its roots in real biological differences.
All Ignatiev’s written material that we’ve seen carries the same odd message with the same extreme wording…Ignatiev writes darkly and dramatically of “abolishing the white race,” “genocide of whites,” etc. When pressed, he emphasizes that that he doesn’t really mean killing people who call themselves white. He only wants to destroy the concept of whiteness. So he’s off the hook, right?
Joyce comments:
Not quite. Ignatiev is really just playing a game of bait and switch. While fully tuned-in to his own Jewish racial identity, he ostensibly follows the PC line that “races” are only “social constructs.” When pressed, he claims to be little more than an extreme egalitarian, against all social hierarchies but especially those in which he imagines Whites to be at the top.
Like MacDonald, Joyce easily sees through Ignatiev’s gambit, writing that “The party line, therefore, is that it’s all about getting White people to stop thinking that they are White – for their own good of course. So while Black studies, women’s studies, Chicano studies etc. all aim to develop and nurture their relative identities and social agendas, ‘Whiteness Studies’ aims to utterly extinguish any sense of identity and awareness of group interests,” a very important distinction indeed.
Much of what Joyce wrote was very familiar to me by 2015. For instance, the wife of Frankfurt School member Herbert Marcuse “devoted much of her time to pushing her ideology through her ‘Unlearning Racism’ workshops, and indoctrinating White teenagers into supporting multiculturalism through her Oakland-based ‘New Bridges’ group.” Another Jewish woman, Ruth Frankenberg, wrote in 1993 that the dogma of her Whiteness discipline
orbits around the belief that race is nothing more than a fluid social, political and historical construct. She argued that while Whites may deny that they are ‘racist,’ they cannot deny that they are White. Frankenberg proceeded to argue that Whites are implicitly racist by virtue of their ‘dominant’ position in western society, and contended that we should ‘critically reflect’ on this social position of dominance that White people occupy in our society. ‘Whiteness Studies’ to Frankenberg, like her predecessors, was therefore nothing more than an exercise in convincing Whites that they are oppressors, whether they wished to be or not, and whether they had actually personally taken part in any oppression or not.
Been there, heard that back in the 90s. I’m sorry now that the broader public is hearing and being submitted to the same thing in the Biden Era.
Joyce had other good things to say. For instance, he found a section from Savitri Devi’s The Lightning and the Sun to be useful in exposing the deceit employed in Jewish aggression:
Inconspicuous, slow, yet implacable persecution, both economic and cultural: the systematic suppression of all possibilities for the vanquished, without it ‘showing,’ the merciless ‘conditioning’ of children, all the more horrible that it is more impersonal, more indirect, more outwardly ‘gentle,’ the clever diffusion of soul-killing lies; violence under the cover of non-violence.
“Violence under the cover of non-violence” — although it could certainly morph into violence if Whites lose power to the rising tide of color, and indeed, we can already see the rise in anti-White violence in the interracial crime statistics and incidents like these, as compiled by AmRen. It was tactics like these that caused me so much distress as an isolated and powerless grad student years ago. Back then I knew of no Kevin MacDonald or Andrew Joyce who could guide me through those roiled waters. While I could recognize my professor’s method as a deliberate form of social engineering, I couldn’t yet figure out how it was done, so I was demoralized because, as E. Michael Jones said in the epigraph which begins this essay, “To be effective, social engineering cannot be perceived,” and I could not fully perceive what these words meant, even as I felt their sting and saw their near universal effectiveness, just as I fear their effectiveness now.
Since grad school, my goal has been to understand this social engineering and explain it to others, which I have attempted relentlessly, in the classroom and in these columns. I now find comfort in the company of men like Andrew Joyce, who concluded in this White Studies piece,
The ‘educational’ programs of the ADL, the obliteration of our national borders, the assassination of our racial identity, and the slow genocide of our people are being accomplished without the bullet, bomb or blades. But it is, and will be, tremendously violent in its implications. Whiteness studies are not part of an academic discipline in any true sense of that term. The genre is an act of inter-ethnic aggression.
Joyce revisited Jewish involvement in Whiteness Studies (again, a close cognate, in my view, of Critical Race Theory) in 2020 with “Review of Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility,” a book that “is heavily and transparently influenced by Jewish thought and by Jewish pioneers in the field she now finds so conducive to fame and fortune.”
Sure enough, Joyce found concrete evidence of this in the bibliography — “so many names from my research on Whiteness Studies. They were almost all there, protruding from the page like shunned relatives at a family reunion — Noel Ignatiev, George Lipsitz, Ruth Frankenberg, Michelle Fine, Lois Weis, along with helpful co-ethnics like Thomas Shapiro, David Wellman, Sander Gilman, Larry Adelman, and Jay Kaufman. These are DiAngelo’s mentors and intellectual forbears …” We are definitely seeing a pattern here.
Critical Race Theory in the News Today
I originally began this essay with a story about Lt. Colonel Matthew Lohmeier, who was fired for publicizing his views on the introduction of CRT into the military. Admittedly, it was asking for trouble to publish a book titled Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Militaryin today’s current climate, but he did. In an online Revolver article concerning the controversy, we find that “Lohmeier appeared on several podcasts to promote his book, and in response the Pentagon fired him. According to the DoD, his statements caused a ‘loss of trust and confidence in his ability to lead.’”
The article continued, “As far as Revolver and tens of millions of American patriots are concerned, Lohmeier’s actions represent the very pinnacle of courage and leadership,” an opinion I’ll second. Still, based on this interview, it seems Lohmeier could benefit from exposure to MacDonald’s Culture of Critique or my short discussion of White Studies above. When a term like “Marxist Race Theory” is used by an author, is it knowingly used as shorthand for “Jewish”? My impression given this interview and my brief exposure to Revolver’s approach is “No.” And that’s a problem. Consider Lohmeier’s words:
I am often asked, “how did this happen?” or, “when did this happen?” How is it, for example, that American people and institutions — predominantly our education system, and now, all federal agencies including even our military services — increasingly resonate and align with Marxist thought? How is it that Americans can now so easily question or forget the greatness of the American ideal and become victims to the tactics of subversion? Why haven’t we been able to recognize our slide into Marxism? There are two ways this has happened: gradually, then suddenly. …
Obviously, if he’s read The Culture of Critique, he knows “how this happened.” Given his relatively young age, if he’s followed the podcasts of The Daily Shoah or read more than a few dozen Andrew Anglin stories on The Daily Stormer, then he knows how this happened. My suspicion, however, is that he has no idea, so someone should forward him this article.
Anyone following American academia for the last three decades will know of the intense leftist slant gaining power with each passing year, and students of politics, the legal system and corporate affairs will be similarly aware. It only makes sense that it was slower to reach the military and that there was some pushback, summed up by Lohmeier with the statement, “There is a growing perception that the preponderance of political partisanship occurring in our armed forces is radical leftist partisanship.” Well, yes it is.
Next, does Lohmeier view the introduction of CRT into the military as being generically harmful, or does he see it as specifically anti-White? Based on the interview, it’s likely that he sees the anti-White import of official programs in today’s military, writing as he does that in one chapter he is critical of an essayist who sees her role in a project “as an attempt to ‘decenter whiteness.’” Sounds like we’re getting back to the White Studies aspect of CRT.
But is it even necessary to ask whether CRT can be evaluated as generically undemocratic or even racist rather than being specifically anti-White? Apparently it is, as a VDARE writer styling himself as “Washington Watcher II” has done in a blog called “Fight Against Critical Race Theory — But They Still Flinch From Calling It Anti-White Racism.” Note the subtitle claiming “They Still Flinch from Calling it Anti-White Racism.” Kind of hard to believe. But Washington Watcher found a CRT critic who “essentially argued that race doesn’t exist, a favorite of Conservatism, Inc. And along with many other cuckservatives, he promotes the cringe idea that CRT is bad because it harms non-whites.” Yes, it really is hard to believe. Our thanks to Washington Watcher for making this distinction clear, especially in his conclusion when he beseeches us to “Repeat after me: CRT isn’t just racism; it’s anti-white racism.”
Conclusion
We’ve reached the point where some are stepping forward to point out the obvious truth that CRT is in fact “anti-White racism.” Much to my surprise, however, I’ve seen little or no evidence that people have pointed to the far more instructive issue that while it is of course anti-White racism, it has been propagated by a long string of Jews for over fifty years. This is because Jews are prosecuting a deadly war on Whites, with previous examples such as the Bolshevik era in Russia, the Holodomor, and the various “cold” strategies documented in The Culture of Critiquesuch as boosting non-white immigration and depressing White family formation. This is the point I am at pains to emphasize.
The consequences of this are immense, beginning with MacDonald’s claim in his 2008 TOO article that after demonizing Whites (or “Whiteness”), “it doesn’t take much imagination to suppose that actual genocide of Whites is the next step.” I couldn’t agree more and have stressed this point for over twelve years here on TOO.Subscribe
I’ll close with a succinct version of all I’ve written about above, one that uses plain language to cut through sometimes lengthy analyses. On June 10, 2021 Andrew Anglin published a piece called Psychoanalytic Journal Publishes Paper Calling “Whiteness” a “Malignant, Parasitic-Like Condition” which is a sort of companion piece to Aruna Khilanani’s fulminations as discussed by MacDonald in “Expressions of Anti-White Hatred in High Places: Aruna Khilanani at Yale” published two days earlier. MacDonald states that “Jews have been a necessary condition for creating multicultural America” and that “It’s no surprise that Khilanani is a textbook example of the influence of the Frankfurt School’s Critical Theory, the forerunner of Critical Race Theory.”
Clearly, Anglin knows the work of Noel Ignatiev and his theories of Whiteness Studies, and immediately recognizes their import to the confessions of the non-white female psychiatrist:
This whole thing of claiming that “whiteness” is somehow different than “being a white person” is just a ruse. No one thinks that makes sense, including the people saying it. They are talking simply about white people.
They want to wipe out white people.
Recently, we saw the Indian psychologist – psychologist again! – Aruna Khilanani saying that she just wants to kill random white people. She didn’t say kill random “people infected with whiteness” – she just said white people.
Talking about “whiteness” as some kind of abstraction is a way for these people to really start pumping up the genocidal mania under a thin veil of semantics.
This puts me in mind of the predictions of Tomislav Sunic in his 2007 book Homo Americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age, where he argued that “in order for the proper functioning of future Americanized society, the removal of millions of surplus citizens must become a social and possibly also an ecological necessity.” MacDonald in those years of writing about “Stalin’s Willing Executioners” (i.e. Jews) identified what sectors might be targeted “and therefore worthy of mass murder by the American counterparts of the Jewish elite in the Soviet Union.” Further,
It is easy to imagine which sectors of American society would have been deemed overly backward and religious and therefore worthy of mass murder by the American counterparts of the Jewish elite in the Soviet Union — the ones who journeyed to Ellis Island instead of Moscow. The descendants of these overly backward and religious people now loom large among the “red state” voters who have been so important in recent national elections. Jewish animosity toward the Christian culture that is so deeply ingrained in much of America is legendary. As Joel Kotkin points out, “for generations, [American] Jews have viewed religious conservatives with a combination of fear and disdain.” And as Elliott Abrams notes, the American Jewish community “clings to what is at bottom a dark vision of America, as a land permeated with anti-Semitism and always on the verge of anti-Semitic outbursts.” These attitudes are well captured in Steven Steinlight’s charge that the Americans who approved the immigration restriction legislation of the 1920s — the vast majority of the population — were a “thoughtless mob” and that the legislation itself was “evil, xenophobic, anti-Semitic,” “vilely discriminatory,” a “vast moral failure,” a “monstrous policy.” In the end, the dark view of traditional Slavs and their culture that facilitated the participation of so many Eastern European shtetl Jews in becoming willing executioners in the name of international socialism is not very different from the views of contemporary American Jews about a majority of their fellow countrymen.
In his June 10, 2021 entry Anglin issued a similar warning, one I feel is a fitting close to this essay:
We are right on the verge of a large-scale culling.
We’ve talked about “white genocide” in terms of mass immigration and using feminism to restrict our breeding — but this cold genocide is about to get hot.
“My ex-wife and I were both raised to believe that men and women should be equal, and both partners should be working. It was detrimental to our children and relationship.” This was a comment left on my video “Women are No Longer Marriage Material.” Most children are being raised to believe that men and women should be equal and as “partners.” They should both be working outside of the home. This makes life much more difficult on everyone when there is no division of roles.
Women, God’s ways aren’t for our harm but for our good. He is the One who created us. He didn’t create men and women the same. We are different, and we have different roles. Women trying to be men and even superior to them has only caused harm to families, marriages, children, and culture.
Anthony, from 21 Studios shared my video on his page. Here are some of the comments that men left.
“Feminism was created and installed in America by an outside enemy. If you haven’t figure out yet this is a weapon to destroy a county, you aren’t awake.”
“My wife and I have been together for 14 years, then she started watching shows like The Viewand she went along with her single mother friends and cousins. My wife and I were best friends. There was nobody I wanted to spend my time and energy with more so than her. Now, I can’t stand her. Just the other day, I ended up heartbroken when I realized that I don’t love her anymore. I’ve just tolerated her for the sake of my son.”
“The really infuriating part is that parents have let the government turn their daughters into debt/tax servants over the last 20 years. It’s too late to apologize now.”
“My manager has a wife who is completely a homemaker. She looks great, always happy, and just idolizes him. He has a pretty hectic career, but she completely takes care of the home and keeps him on track. They have a child, and she just looks so fulfilled. This video is completely spot on, and I really admire her honesty.”
“A man’s list of things a woman needs to do to make him happy: full stomach, regular sex, and peace and quiet sometimes. Women’s list of things a man needs to do to make her happy: not enough room to list it all here. It would take pages. Yet women are the ones saying men are too controlling and expect too much.”
“You are right! My wife turned from God and now is following feminism which is satanism. These societies hate God. It hates the truth. It hates children.”
“Everything she said in this video is exactly what men have been dying to speak up about for years now, but men can’t because it’s considered sexist, misogynistic, or hateful to hold any sort of criticisms against women.”
“This is a very wise and correct woman. Most women today are very selfish, argumentative, and defiant. When women try to lead the relationship, it is doomed to misery and failure because it’s not natural. I’m in one of these relationships now, and it really sucks. I have a deep sadness in my heart, because I know that a relationship should be more fun and mutual. It’s not.”
It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling [quarrelsome, contentious] woman in a wide house. Proverbs 21:9
A person takes photos while water is released from the Three Gorges Dam, a gigantic hydropower project on the Yangtze river, to relieve flood pressure in Yichang, central China’s Hubei province on July 19, 2020. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)
According to the Chinese Water Resources Ministry (CWRM), China’s main flood season in the south officially began on June 1; since May, at least 97 rivers have exceeded warning levels, an increase of about 10 percent from a year earlier as of May 27.
Official data showed that 89 rivers were flooded above the warning level and 3.709 million people were affected in 18 provinces, including Hunan, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, etc.
In the Yangtze River basin, dozens of rivers in the Wu River system (a major tributary of the Upper Yangtze), the Three Gorgesregion, the Dongting Lake system, and the Poyang Lake system had floods above the warning level, and the entire Xiang River in the Dongting Lake system recorded floodwaters exceeding the warning level.
In 2020, the Yangtze River Basin experienced severe flooding, the worst since 1998, with the highest water level in Chongqing since 1981, and a rare occurrence of flooding in the urban area of the city.
The Three Gorges Dam (also known as the Three Gorges Hydropower Station and the Three Gorges Project) is located in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River, and there are more than 50,000 dams in the region.
In a regular State Council meeting on April 22, the CWRM introduced the current task focused on ensuring the safety of the reservoir during the flood season. The CWRM explained, “more than 80 percent of the 98,000 reservoirs in China were built in the 1950s and 1970s.”
The buildings were submerged after heavy rain caused flooding in Hengyang in central China’s Hunan province on July 9, 2019. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
Ticking Time Bombs in China
“There is no river in China without reservoirs and dams. Even the rivers that flow through Tibet’s Lhasa and Xigaze also have many reservoirs and dams. The density of reservoir dams in China is unprecedented in the world,” Dr. Weiluo Wang, wrote in a communication to Chinese readers in 2019.
Wang is a renowned expert in land planning and water conservation who is now living in Germany.
“The most terrible thing is that 40 [percent] of the 90,000 reservoir dams are dangerous dams, which are unsafe, and there are tens of thousands of reservoirs and dams deserted.
“These are time bombs that may explode at any time,” he wrote.
He also explained that the dangerous dam reservoir was exactly the culprit of the various severe floods throughout China in the Communist regime’s history.
In 1975, more than 50 reservoirs on the Huaihe River collapsed one after another because of heavy rainfall during the hit of Typhoon Nina, causing 230,000 deaths. It is also known as the 1975 Banqiao Dam failure, the worst dam disaster in history. Even though the Communist regime called it a natural disaster, Wang explained the root causes of the catastrophe.
Origins of the Flood Disasters in Modern China
Since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) took power in 1949, the regime has built 90,000 reservoir dams; half of the world’s dams are now located in China.
In a recent interview with The Epoch Times, Wang said that regarding the 98,000 reservoirs in China, it does not include small reservoirs that were not up to par and the fact is that even the CWRM itself is not clear about the exact number of reservoirs built after the CCP took power.
Banqiao Dam, China. (Public Domain)
Jiao Yong, former Vice Minister of Water Resources, now Chairman of Chinese National Committee on Large Dams (CHINCOLD), admitted that more than 95 percent of Chinese dams were made of earth and rock, and that they have not been effective in preventing floods. He warned of the safety risks posed by these reservoirs and dams at a conference in 2017.
Wang put it frankly, “The CCP’s dams typically lack technical design.”
He took the flooding of Xingtai in 2016 as an example. The upstream Dongchuankou Reservoir was built without a flood-control gate.
He said, “It was a directional blasting technique (DBT) in 1959 with the help of Soviet experts. Some said that over 200 tons of dynamite were used for the blasting, and others said over 300 tons of dynamite were used. The blasting was done on the mountains on both sides. That was how the reservoir was built. The dam collapsed in 1963 due to flooding from the Hai River, and was rebuilt in 1965. This is a typical reservoir built by the CCP in China.”
The DBT makes use of the energy created by the blasting to throw the mountain rocks in a predetermined direction to form a dam. This technique saves digging, transporting, filling, rolling, etc, by human or mechanical means that are needed otherwise.
After the 2016 floods, the Xingtai municipal reservoir expert admitted that Dongchuankou Reservoir is “mainly for flood control,” but “flood discharge [of the reservoir] cannot be controlled.”
Chaotic Management of Reservoirs in China
Wang said that the regime adopted the practice of contracting dam construction in the early 1980s. However, there were no clear terms for reservoir maintenance, and there were conflicts between the interests of the contractors and the safety of the reservoirs.
He explained, “The [CWRM] only manages 100 plus large reservoirs, the provincial authorities manage medium-sized reservoirs, and the county and township authorities each manage a group of reservoirs. The township would contract the reservoirs to individuals [for the management], and form a contracting relationship. Who is responsible for the maintenance of the reservoirs? It is not made clear. Under the contract, the contractor has the right to use the reservoir.”
Consequently, the contractor’s interests come from the water in the reservoir.
This overhead view shows trees and houses submerged by floodwaters after the heavy rainfall hit a dam along the Xiangyang River in Xinji Village in Yangzhou in east China’s Jiangsu province on July 6, 2016. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)
Wang added: “The more water, the more power generated. This is beneficial for the contractors. They are not willing to discharge water from the reservoir. So the authorities have to pay the contractors to discharge water from the reservoir.
“The CCP had no relief money for the victims of the 2020 flooding because the flood control fund had been given to the contractors.”
Reflecting on the Xingtai flood in 2016, then Minister of Water Resources Chen Lei said that early warnings should be issued in time.
“What Chen Lei did not say is who exactly is the main body to issue the warning. The Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarters at the central, the provincial, the municipal, or the local, or at the local reservoir management?” Wang explained.
He added, “Who will bear the administrative responsibility for deaths and property losses caused by failure to issue flood release warnings? Who will bear administrative responsibility for the economic losses caused by the issuance of an incorrect flood release warning?”
“Since Chen Lei indirectly admitted the disasters were caused in part by a failure to issue an early warning before the flood discharge, the victims ought to be compensated. But the CCP would not do it. The easiest way is to shift the responsibility to heavenly God and the heavy rainfall that exceeded ‘historical highs,’” Wang said.
The Socialist System with Chinese Characteristics
Amidst multiple floods across mainland China, People’s Daily published an article in March, claiming that “investigation and rectification of the small hydropower projects in the Yangtze River Economic Belt have been basically completed.”
The CCP spends a lot of money every year on the “rectification” of its reservoirs, which are still becoming increasingly unsafe.
Wang told The Epoch Times that after the 1975 Banqiao Dam failure that caused 240,000 deaths, the CWRM surveyed the reservoirs in China. It announced that 30 percent of surveyed reservoirs were perilous. The statistics later went up to 40 percent, 50 percent, and 74 percent. “The more reservoirs the CCP rectifies, the greater investment it pours in. By 2016, it had invested about $29.5 billion, equivalent to the cost of the Three Gorges Project,” Wang said.
The People’s Daily report also claimed that, during the rectification, the withdrawn hydropower stations were outdated and small, they impeded flood discharge, but were also uneconomical to be repaired.
Wang added that looking back in history, every minister of water resources has demanded more budget for reservoir maintenance after taking office, but the main culprit remains unsolved. They eventually ascribe the failure to the reservoirs’ falling into disrepair over the years and a shortage of central subsidies.
Wang emphasized that the so-called rectification is a way of shirking responsibility. He explained that the rectification actually removed a large number of reservoirs from its system. More than 3,000 reservoirs were delisted while they objectively still exist.
“There is nothing but silt in reservoirs. What will happen to the silt in the 3,000-plus abandoned reservoirs when a flood strikes? If silt-filled water rushes down and blocks downstream river channels, there will be devastating disasters,” said Wang.
Wang gave two examples to illustrate his viewpoint: the 2016 Xiangjiang River flood arose from a dam failure upon a flood strike because a myriad of abandoned reservoirs in Xiangjiang River Basin lacked governance and maintenance; the 2010 Zhouqu mudflow disaster resulted from the impact of a deserted dam which was filled at first and then collapsed. Years of soil collected in the dam was washed off the collapsed dam.
Family members cry during the funeral of a victim killed by a reservoir collapse in Yiliang County of Yunnan Province, southwest China on July 22, 2005. (China Photos/Getty Images)
Knowing that the regime cannot simply leave those reservoirs abandoned; rather, it should demolish them and restore ecosystems to their original state. But will the regime take responsibility and do a sensible job?
Perhaps the answer was already given. Xing Yuanyue, the deputy director of Rural Water Resources and Hydropower Department, told the regime’s mouthpiece Xinhua News this April, “withdrawing a small hydropower station is no less difficult than building a new one.”
Expert’s Advice to Local Residents
As for the best advice Wang would give to the tens of millions of Chinese surrounded by the 80,000 plus time bombs, he once wrote: prepare yourself one or more self-inflated rubber boats, enough bottled water and food, flashlights or lighters, life jacket, and learn from the Japanese to prepare yourself a grab and go bag with necessary miscellaneous items, calling devices. When faced with floods from a failed dam, do not shut doors and windows, but open the doors and windows to let the flood pass through.
Wang particularly emphasized that people in Fuling and Kaixian County of the Three Gorges Reservoir area should especially be reminded that a majority of residents live in areas below the normal water storage line of the Three Gorges Reservoir, which is over 570 feet above sea level. They rely on the embankment to block the reservoir water. These residents were supposed to be relocated. In order to reduce the number and expenses of the people displaced by the Three Gorges Reservoir, the regime allowed them to stay. Therefore, “if possible, move as fast as you can.”
I love my wife. In fact, those who know me, know that I often wear a T shirt that says just that… just a plain black T shirt with the words: “I Love My Wife.” Wearing this shirt in public never fails to stir a reaction and start a conversation. With most people, it’s as if they’ve never seen anything so strange — a guy wearing a T shirt that says, “I Love My Wife” on it.
Usually the women will smile and say something like, “Oh, that’s so sweet.” But most often the men will laugh at me and say something like, “Did your wife buy that for you?” Or, “Did your wife make you wear that?” “Nope,” I smile. “I bought it myself!” Most just shake their heads and laugh.
But why is it so strange, so odd, so laughable that a man would want to proclaim to the world that he loves his wife? Sadly, that’s how things are in this day and age. More common is the married man who will complain to his co-workers and friends about his “old ball and chain.” Or call her something like “my old lady.” And then there are the wives, who complain to THEIR friends about their fat, old lazy husband. Such seems to be the state of marriage in our world today.
God’s Word, however, says otherwise, about His design and intent for marriage. Proverbs 18:22, “He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord.” THAT is an understatement if ever there was one! My wife is the most precious gift God has ever given me in this life. I can’t imagine life without her.
God designed marriage to be the union of one man and one woman, and it was meant to be for life. Jesus Himself said that the very idea of divorce was a man-made concept. “…because of the hardness of your heart,” He said. And then He went on: “But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no man put asunder.”
But now, almost 50% of all marriages are “put asunder.” Studies show that the average marriage in America today lasts only about eight years. That’s long enough for the couple to have children, but not long enough for the couple to raise them in an intact home, and so the children must suffer the breakup of their family and lose the security of their home. Studies also show that this always leaves the children with life-long emotional scars.
Surely the enemy of our souls is wreaking havoc on our families today. The very definition of “family” has been changed in recent years to mean whatever we want it to mean — two “Mommies,” two “Daddies,” a “Daddy” with two “Mommies,” a “Mommy, a Daddy and Mommy’s ‘special friend.’” … whatever.
What’s more, many of today’s young people are not even GETTING married to begin with anymore. Cohabitation — living together without being married — has increased by 900% since 1970. It seems people want to “test drive” a potential spouse before committing to marriage. But study after study shows that those who live together before marriage have a 35% higher divorce rate than those who don’t.
I’m grieved by the fact that there are so very many couples today who are unhappy in their marriages and so many that are divorcing. Indeed being UNhappily married seems to be the “norm” today. If you’re happy in your marriage and you actually love your spouse, YOU are the strange one. Just wear a T shirt like mine and see the reaction you get.
Yet as newlyweds, young couples are so in love with one another. They love to spend time together, they love and serve one another and they work hard in their relationship to bless each other and please each other and satisfy each other’s needs. But sadly, it’s now expected that the couple will most certainly grow apart the longer they’re married; as if that’s just a natural and normal eventuality. Life gets hard, people get bored and discontented. There are bills to pay and work to be done. Most of all, people become selfish and self-centered. But again, that’s not God’s design for marriage — or family.
In fact, it’s precisely BECAUSE of those hard times that MY marriage has become stronger, because we’ve gone through those hard times TOGETHER, and WITH GOD at the center of our union. Would life be any less difficult doing it alone? If you’re discontented in your marriage, will you not STILL be discontented if you’re alone? If you divorce will there not STILL be bills to pay and work to be done? Do you think any of that will be easier doing it ALONE? Or is it just your intention to “trade up” to a “newer model” spouse, simply because you’ve become bored with the original? THAT is the DEFINITION of “selfish” and “self-centered.”
The only biblical reason for a couple ever to divorce is because of unfaithfulness and infidelity. Yet even issues like these can be worked out, with repentance and grace. Sadly though, many are just not interested in doing the work it takes to keep their marriage, family and home intact. We live in a “throw-away” society, where there’s no longer any sort of stigma attached to living together unmarried or to having an extra-marital sexual or emotional relationship or to being divorced. These things, like just about everything else the devil could dream up, are considered perfectly “normal” today. But whatever happened to “‘til death do we part?” Or, “as long as we both shall live?” Indeed — a few years ago my wife and I attended a wedding where the couple changed those time-honored vows to say: “As long as we both shall LOVE.” In other words, “as long as we still have this same emotional feeling we have for each other today, but after that, no promises.” So much for the sanctity of the marriage covenant.
My advice, if you want to hear it, is do not live together UNTIL you’re married. Keep your marriage bed pure. Take your vows before God — and take them seriously — and then INCLUDE God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit IN your marriage. Those who serve as witnesses in your wedding party are there for just that reason: they are WITNESSES of the vows you’re taking before God. Choose your wedding party wisely — make sure they are GODLY people, who are not just there to wear the shiny dress or the neat tuxedo and stand there looking good.
You see, most people don’t realize that your maid of honor, your best man and your other wedding party witnesses are there to hold you accountable to those vows you make. Unfortunately, what most often happens, is people choose their best friends to “stand up” in the wedding. And then when trouble comes in the marriage, they run to those same “best friends” to complain about their spouse and cry on their shoulders. Then, instead of those witnesses giving the troubled couple Godly counsel and helping to build the marriage up, the bridesmaids say, “Whatever makes you happy, you go girl…” and the groomsmen say, “man, you don’t have to put up with all this… there’s plenty of fish in the sea.” So instead of doing their JOB and making sure the couple remains faithful to their vows, they actually ENCOURAGE separation, infidelity and divorce — if it makes their friends “happy.” Instead of helping to BUILD your marriage and help you weather the storms of life that WILL come, they’re actually undermining your marriage, under the guise of being your “friends.” We need a return to moral absolutes. And if we take a vow before God, we’d better MEAN it.
I understand life today is complicated, busy, filled with distractions and it can be easy to become discouraged, discontented and depressed. Life can be overwhelming. But do not forsake your marriage vows. And with Christ at the center of your marriage, you never will. Yet many today have little to no time for God — unless they need something. They may have a FORM of Godliness, (or today it’s more likely to be a form of “spirituality,”) but it’s a faith with no power. I don’t know how anyone can get through this life without a close, abiding relationship with Jesus — married or unmarried. And as we know, a cord of three strands is not easily broken. So keep Christ at the center of your marriage and you will weather the storms of life together and come out stronger at the end.
I’d also advise you to turn off the TV, turn off the phones, tablets, computers, and other distractions and focus on your spouse more. It’s easy to come home at the end of a long work day and collapse in your favorite chair and then turn on some time-wasting, mind-numbing “entertainment” on the television. Or for a married couple to sit together in the same room hour after hour, never speaking or even looking at one another. Instead, they’re looking at their phone, or some other distraction. “Device” usage has become epidemic. It’s an addiction. I’d advise you to unplug — and then interact with the one you love.
What would be more profitable for your marriage? Spending night after night watching TV or Facebook — or giving your husband or wife a back rub or a foot massage after a long hard day at work? As you SERVE the other person, you will find you’re not only blessing THEM, but YOU will also be filled with more loving emotions for them — and find YOURSELF equally, if not more blessed because of your loving service. And if you haven’t had a good relationship for a while and you don’t “feel” that love you think you need to have BEFORE you can serve them — just trust me: do the ACTIONS first and the feelings will quickly follow. If you still can’t bring yourself to serve your spouse with a pure, loving heart, then do it the Colossians 3:23 way: “as unto the Lord, and not to men.”
If you have children, you’ll also be modeling a good marriage for THEM. They watch everything you do, you know. Husbands, love your wives properly and your daughters will learn the attributes to look for in a man when it comes time for THEM to get married. Likewise, your sons will learn how to properly treat their future wives. And when Mom and Dad have a good, solid, strong relationship, it helps the children to feel much more safe and secure and loved themselves.
So SERVE each other. Don’t think only about yourself and your needs which you perceive as not being met. If you’re in a troubled marriage, your needs probably AREN’T being met — but consider also that neither are your spouse’s needs being met. Do YOUR part first. Some will say they just CAN’T — they don’t “feel” it. Things have gone too far down the wrong path and there’s no love in the marriage anymore. They’ll say they can’t serve their spouse because they have fallen out of love… they may even be at the point where the very sight of their spouse makes their blood boil and they feel nothing but contempt for their partner.
That’s very sad, indeed. But again: do the ACTIONS first, and the feelings will follow. You know, a lot of the problems that couples encounter in marriages stem from one thing, and the devil uses it very effectively against us: PRIDE. How often we have arguments with our wives or husbands, and then days and weeks go by… you may not even remember what the original argument was about anymore. Yet the hurt gets worse and the heart gets harder, the longer you remain prideful and stubborn.
How do you counter this and ruin the devil’s plans to hurt you both — and maybe even destroy your marriage? SIMPLE: you drop your pride. Whatever the argument was about, it doesn’t matter. Whoever was wrong; doesn’t matter. Even if you still believe you were absolutely in the right and your spouse was absolutely and completely wrong about EVERYTHING — even if you believe you’re the victim and your spouse “owes” you something. Just forget all that. Drop your pride. Go to him or her, hug them and just say, “I’m sorry.” Try that. You will see that invisible wall of separation between the two of you crumble before your very eyes. Your relationship will be restored within seconds.
Then you can talk about things more, communicate better, kiss and “make up.” Rather than letting an unresolved issue simmer and boil to the point of divorce, YOU have the power to fix things in an instant of time, by simply letting go of your pride and saying two little words, “I’m sorry.”
Marriage is meant to be one of God’s greatest blessings in this life. A husband and wife, together as one, with Christ at the center of their union, and a home filled with children… and eventually grandchildren, brought up and raised in the fear and admonition of the Lord. It’s so sad that we forsake such unfathomable blessings because of our own selfish, foolish pride… because we allow distractions and the cares of this world to drive a wedge between us… because we allow the enemy of our souls to distract us with discontentment, even though we are so amazingly blessed. Friends, count those blessings, love your spouse, get rid of the pride and soften your heart; SERVE the one you love and thank God for them. Pray FOR them and WITHthem. If you do these things you’ll find you have a marriage that others will envy and one which makes God smile with joy. The Lord loves us; let us love our spouses with powerful love like THAT.
Mike Lindell, the MyPillow guy, has been quoted several times as saying he believes Trump will be reinstated as president later this year (he mentioned August). I’m very doubtful of this, if for no other reason that, realistically, at this point it would take military action, and I don’t think our “woke” military would do it.
That aside, the U.S. is clearly facing an onrushing conjunction of crises likely to hit around that time, if not sooner. First, the number of voters convinced that last year’s election was stolen refuses to budgeregardless of the volume of the Establishment’s denials and ridicule — and no matter the lawfare being waged against Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Rudy Giuliani, Lindell, and others. If anything, the Establishment appears terrified of what will turn up in Maricopa Co., Arizona, and that calls for independent audits will spread to other states.
This is America’s collapsed and partly delegitimized political system. All the propaganda about how talk of a stolen election “threatens democracy” is just that: propaganda. The U.S. has not been an actual democracy, answering even to a majority of voters, at any point in our lifetimes. Gilens & Page showed this. That article is dense and restrained in its conclusions, but worth slogging through.
The approved narrative about the election could collapse, and if it does, a reckoning of some sort is inevitable. It might not happen this year, but it will happen eventually.
And this is not the only narrative at risk of losing all credibility.
If you want to see what a collapsed approved narrative looks like, think of the theory that the coronavirus said to cause Covid-19 evolved in bats and jumped to humans, possibly through an intermediary species, in a Chinese “wet market.”
As recently as six months ago, if you said that the cause of Covid came from the Wuhan lab, you were an “unhinged conspiracy theorist.” Even though the “evidence” for the coronavirus’s natural origins was never more than educated guesswork.
Wade has his detractors. For example, this. That’s the quality of the criticism, and added evidence that in our long-collapsed higher educational system, logic is either no longer taught, or taught so badly that graduates who profess to be educated have no idea what attacking ad hominem means or what is wrong with doing it. SJWs and wokesters clearly don’t understand the concept.
It is one more small step to another forbidden idea: that this thing did not merely come from the Wuhan lab, but was engineered as a bioweapon. The only remaining question then is: who were the bioweapon’s prime movers? Was it the Chinese Communist Party, was it the American Deep State out to attack or possibly set up China? Or did both cut a deal with GloboCorp, the globalist ownership class that wants a world government that would answer to its corporations?
One of the things bothering me about the idea that China is fully to blame for the disaster is that among the first to be infected with Covid outside China were members of the leadership in Iran. The Chinese and the Iranians (1) are a good distance away, suggesting that the appearance of Covid there was not an accident, but (2) China and Iran are closer to being allies than they are enemies.
Would the Chinese have infected the Iranians on purpose? I don’t think so. The American Establishment hates Iran, though. And behind the American Establishment is, of course, GloboCorp. Iran is one of the few countries left without a central bank controlled by the Rothschild-Rockefeller axis; but for the U.S., or the U.S. and Israel together, to try to take down Iran militarily the way the U.S. did Saddam Hussein’s Iraq would be suicidal. This opens the door to other options.
The virus seems designed (1) to bring direct harm to the elderly and those with compromised immune and respiratory systems, removing “useless eaters” from society; (2) to set the stage for the mass media induced panic we have seen across the globe, over something not especially deadly to the rest of the population, leading to the lockdowns, travel restrictions, the economic destruction we’ve seen; and where possible, political destabilization; and (3) by way of all these, the redistribution of power and wealth upwards.
Who, after all, has profited the most from this debacle? The answer: Western globalist billionaires.
Is it not at least conceivable that this whole affair has been one of the final phases of the global war against “populism” (i.e., those who reject economic domination by the world’s globalist centralizers) and financially independent middle classes everywhere?
How long before the approved narrative, that this whole thing has just been an unfortunate accident (even if the virus came from the Wuhan lab) collapses? What will the reckoning look like? Will pitchforks come out and heads roll (so to speak)?
It gets worse.
As everyone knows, the experimental mRNA vaccines were rushed out at the start of this year. As everyone also knows, none have received actual FDA approval but only “emergency use authorization.” The fact that previous vaccines have required years of testing and refinement has been dropped down the Orwellian memory hole. We are not even allowed to say that the inventor of mRNA technology has expressed great hesitation about using it. Big Tech has been routinely censoring exposés on the effects of spike proteins and deplatforming criticsdespite often impeccable credentials.
All roads have clearly led to the mRNA vaccines. This explains the near-brutal suppression of information about other cures for Covid: hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and other products known to be safe (the first has been in use for decades, after all!). Or just the benefits of common sense cleanliness, sound nutrition, sunlight, exercise, the ability to destress, and get sound sleep: all conditions of genuine public health practices never emphasized because they do not bring profits to the multibillion dollar pharmaceutical industry (Big Pharma) — and voided by locking people indoors!
The corporate media wing of the Establishment is propagandizing us worldwide about something no one can know for sure: that these vaccines are both effective and safe. Americans are told that coronavirus rates are dropping where the majority of people are vaccinated. My own research tells me otherwise: Chile where I’ve lived for nine years now has now vaccinated almost two thirds of its population, and we are one of the most locked down and travel-restricted places in the world, with thousands of PCR-test positives (not actual cases of Covid, mind you!) reported daily.
The truth is, the number of injuries and deaths from these mRNA injections is much higher than you’ll ever hear from the Establishment. In the first four months of their use, these injections killed more people than all earlier vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 (15 and a half years). By April 2021, Americans were experiencing roughly 30 deaths per day. Now some might retort that 30 deaths per day is a small number to weigh against the tens of millions who have been vaccinated. But remember one absolutely crucial: no one knows the long term effects of these injections!
The worst case scenarios hold that the spike proteins, already known to cause clotting in some patients which can lead to strokes and heart attacks, will work its damage cumulatively on the vaccinated person’s blood, cell walls and organs, and eventually brain, causing a combination of immune system collapse, organ failure, dementia, and death. These scenarios envision cases to begin surfacing in large numbers in about two years.
I do not know that this will happen, of course. I’m not a doctor or a virologist, but I know of doctors who are warning people not to take the vaccines and other medical professionals who are refusing.
Some of the admittedly wilder stuff coming my way contends that what this campaign is about is not a restoration of normality but long term depopulation.
My wife and I have been to the Georgia Guidestones, a monument the origins of which are enshrouded in mystery. In several languages, it urges the reduction of the world’s population to 500 million, to “restore balance with nature.”
Bill Gates and others of GloboCorp’s billionaire superelite class have often spoken about the need for “population control.”
Thus far, Fox News’s Tucker Carlson is the only person anywhere near the mainstream asking the forbidden question, “How many Americans have died after taking the Covid vaccine?” How many people are gambling their lives because they’ve been told by the Establishment that getting a Covid vaccine is the way back to “normalcy”?
It is clear: we already see three stages of vaccine compliance. First are those lining up to get the jab, seeing it as the fastest path back to a normalcy that probably isn’t coming. Second are those who are hesitant (notice how vaccine hesitancy is now a public heresy), but able to be incentivized through cash bonuses, free food, etc. The third stage punishes those who do not respond to the incentives with job losses, refusals of college re-enrollment, restrictions on movement, or other hardships.
This means we are presently moving from Stage Two to Stage Three.
In fourth stage, criticisms of the mRNA vaccines are not merely censored but actually criminalized, perhaps labeled as akin to domestic terrorists, long one of the Establishment’s favor forms of demonizing. In the fifth stage, paid enforcers with lists of refuseniks go from door to door and offer them a choice between getting jabbed and going to jail.
These things will happen if the powerful want them to happen.
More important for our purposes here: what happens if some version of the scenario above actually begins, and the number of clearly vaccine-related deaths grows to the point where it becomes impossible to hide?
Will this approved narrative, over the safety of these mRNA vaccines, collapse as quickly as did the narrative about the origin of the coronavirus?
What then? With hundreds of millions of people vaxxed worldwide, I have no trouble envisioning a mass panic if “their” governments and approved media outlets start sending out messages like, “There might be a problem with the vaccines for Covid.”
Especially if another Nicholas Wade appears, with another detailed essay about vaccine injuries, assembling all the information we have about the effects spike proteins have on body systems, and the essay appears on a heavily-trafficked website such as Medium.
It is quickly reproduced and circulated, so that what it contains can’t be suppressed.
When people begin to fear for their lives in large numbers, their behavior changes radically!
This is as much a recipe for catastrophic breakdown as would be the deaths themselves! More so than the realization that we have an illegitimate administration in the White House every thought of being!
This, I think, is one of the reasons the Establishment is doing everything it can to contain the spread of information about vaccine injuries and deaths.
And should this fail to work, perhaps creating yet another more immediate crisis will.
Enter the cyberattack on Colonial Pipeline in early May, in which a hacked password led to a shutdown and the crippling of gas distribution across several states for a few days. The warning was clear: more cyberattacks (to be blamed on Russia, naturally, when they aren’t blamed on China) could be imminent.
Last week as I write this, I learned of an “event” which shut down websites of several major airlines and banks for several hours. That was Wednesday, June 16. Was that a cyberattack? We don’t know, but no one ruled it out. It wasn’t the first such “event,” and doubtless won’t be the last.
How many more “events” are coming?
Or is a Big One (we’ll call it) on the way?
A major cyberattack could force the shutdown of a significant portion of the electric grid for an indeterminant amount of time. Not to mention the potential for theft of personal information and resources. In a digitized world in which everything is connected to everything else, this is a clear and present danger.
Here is one depiction of what might ensue, and I repeat the advice of earlier articles to get out of big cities while you still can.
Effects of vaccines, whatever they are, will quickly become the least of people’s worries!
When GloboCorp’s mouthpieces are working to protect what may be their primary agenda for this decade, which is to gain global domination while they can, they won’t hesitate to distract from that with other on-the-ground crises of their creation (not “the Russians”).
That would solve the problem of other approved narratives that are either collapsing or on the verge of doing so — including the one about an economy actually “recovering” despite being based entirely on gazillions and gazillions of dollars of printed money.
Many of us have become convinced that GloboCorp wants world domination by 2030. Why? Because its major mouthpieces have said so. See also here. Those aren’t “conspiracy sites.” Their authors may write in code (“sustainability,” “inclusion,” “ending poverty,” etc.), but otherwise they’re quite open about it. What they plan will require a degree of centralization and technocratic controls never before seen.
Why the rush? Simple. As I’ve said before, the Internet democratized information. Anyone could research and learn about, and eventually write about, anything that interested them.
The fact that all the significant events of the past hundred years, with very few exceptions, have led in a single direction— toward global dominance by a few extremely wealthy and well-placed families — came to interest me.
This was after I’d realized, based on my investigations into matters of race, sex, affirmative action, and preferential hiring, that academia was more about perpetuating leftist ideology and agendas than it was finding and communicating truth. Why would those be the only arenas compromised?
I was hardly alone. By the middle of the last decade the number of people who understand that something was going on behind the scenes, that both “the experts” and mass media were lying to them on a routine basis, was approaching a critical mass.
This was very dangerous to GloboCorp’s owners. Especially with rising opposition movements and “populists” being elected to public office all over the world!
As I’ve insisted for five years now, Trump became president because all the mainstream-approved narratives had collapsed: lost credibility with a critical mass of voters.
Now with Trump gone following the jankiest election in U.S. history and an abundance of evidence that there is far more to this “pandemic” than meets the eye, things are coming to a head.
The superelites either shut down these trends, including locking down the democracy of information, or they face an existential threat.
In a nutshell, we may have the best and most elegant explanation for the converged catastrophes of our time: a weaponized coronavirus, a stolen election, experimental vaccines being forced on an increasingly reluctant public, cyberattacks and other “events,” deplatforming and censorship, and the weaponizing of language to discredit those whose business is exposing approved narratives as they collapse in front of our eyes.
Steven Yates’s latest book What Should Philosophy Do? A Theory will be published later this year by Wipf and Stock.
Author and radio host Alan Stang, a longstanding champion for conservativism and outspoken opponent of communism in the U.S., died yesterday. He was 77 years old.
Stang began his career in communications as an editor for Prentice-Hall before moving on to radio at NBC in New York City. The award-winning journalist also worked as one of Mike Wallace’s first writers before Wallace became a fixture of “60 Minutes” and went toe-to-toe in the ratings against Larry King, when the two hosted competing radio shows in Los Angeles. Stang boasted that despite broadcasting on a station of significantly less power, his program drew twice as many listeners as King’s.
“My dad spent his whole life fighting for this country,” Stang’s son Jay told WND. “He saw something to fight for, just like every one of us. He never gave up, even when he had to fight for his own life instead. His treasure was truly in heaven. He loved Jesus Christ with all his heart, and he loved his family. He was able to hold his first two grandchildren in his arms and look them in the eye. He is happy now and has no more pain or sorrow. He is with his savior.”
Over his long career, Stang also served as a foreign correspondent and wrote hundreds of feature articles for national and online magazines. A regular contributor to NewsWithViews.com, Stang also authored 17 books, for which he won several awards, including a citation from the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for journalistic excellence.
Advertisement – story continues below
Among his books is the popular “It’s Very Simple,” the acclaimed novel “The Highest Virtue” and “Scumbags I Have Known,” which features Mike Wallace on the cover.
According to his RBN bio page, one of Stang’s exposés stopped a criminal power grab in New Mexico when a gang seized a court house, held a judge hostage and killed a deputy. The scheme was close to success before Stang intervened. Another Stang exposé inspired major reforms in federal labor legislation.
The family reports that Stang passed away from a fast-moving form of cancer. A private ceremony will be held to honor his memory this week, though the family is planning a more public memorial service some time within the next several weeks.
Stang himself wrote a fitting eulogy summarizing both his political and worldview battles, as well as his hope for the future in a column titled “Why We Shall Win: How I Know”:
“God erupts at the most unlikely times in the most unlikely places,” Stang writes. “Scripture tells of many times he temporarily suspended his own rules, the laws of physics. I believe that however bad it gets, he will do so again. However much dictatorship we suffer, he will confound it for his pleasure. Why? Because he can, because he is a God of endless, overwhelming, inexhaustible power.”
Advertisement – story continues below
Stang continues, “But always, despite the horror satanic men have made of things, the Spirit hovers, waiting, watching; God, total power, serene, inexhaustible, overwhelming power, preparing to confound them for his pleasure. Rejoice! He rises!”
There are five important aspects of Martin Luther King’s career: 1) his Communist Party activities; 2) the violence that always erupted in a King demonstration; 3) his plagiarism; 4) his sexual pathology; 5) his pagan beliefs.
Martin Luther King attended a Communist training school in Tennessee. A famous picture shows him enjoying a lecture in the company of Communist Aubrey Williams and Abner W. Berry, a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. Rosa Parks, who helped King launch the Montgomery Bus Boycott, learned how to do it at the same Communist training school. …Suddenly, King started to make speeches about the war in Vietnam. Well-meaning Americans scratched their heads. The war took him far afield from “civil rights,” and his speeches started sounding like enemy propaganda cooked up in Hanoi. The reason was that Stanley Levison was writing those speeches. So who was Stanley Levison?
Stanley was the paymaster in this country for the KGB, the Soviet secret police. The KGB routinely sent Levison the rubles to pay for all Soviet activities in the United States, and he would distribute the money. How high up in the Soviet apparatus would you have to be – how much would the KGB have to trust you – to get that job? Stanley Levison, of the KGB, financed King and wrote his speeches. That is correct: the Soviet secret police financed Martin Luther King and put the words in his mouth. King was said to be “heroic” because he was an apostle of Mohandas K. Gandhi’s non-violence in India. For that reason, many Americans at the time wondered why it was that, wherever King went, violence erupted. Why the paradox? King explained it himself, in a piece he wrote for Saturday Review, April 3, 1965 (“Behind the Selma March,” pp. 16-17, 57), in which he set forth the four steps of his technique: “1. Nonviolent demonstrators go into the streets to exercise their constitutional rights. 2. Racists resist by unleashing violence against them. 3. Americans of conscience in the name of decency demand federal intervention and legislation. 4. The administration, under mass pressure, initiates measures of immediate intervention and remedial legislation.” Remember, this is not something we are accusing him of. King wrote this himself. Notice that step two of his formulation calls for violence. The reason violence broke out wherever he went was that violence was what he went into the streets to get. Without the necessary violence, his schemes would fall flat. So, in King’s scenario, why would “racists” attack “nonviolent” demonstrators? Drue Lackey was Montgomery, Alabama Chief of Police. In a speech in October, 2006, he explained that in the famous confrontation of 1965, “non-violent” demonstrators tried to provoke his policemen to react, by throwing “non-violent” bottles and bricks, and bedecking them with gobs of spit, while other “non-violent” demonstrators waited nearby to take pictures… PLAGIARISM On December 3, 1989, Frank Johnson revealed in the British Sunday Telegraph, that Ralph Luker, associate editor of the King Papers Project, said King had “borrowed” heavily from the thesis of Jack Boozer, fellow Boston University theology student and later Professor of Religion at Emory. While Boozer was away in the military, King stole his work. In September, 1990, Thomas Fleming wrote in Chronicles that King’s doctorate should be considered a courtesy title, because he had plagiarized his dissertation. If the truth had leaked, Boston University would have been humiliated. It is a short distance from B.U. to P.U. So, B.U. President Jon Westling sent a letter to Chronicles (published in the January, 1991 issue) denying Fleming’s charge. Westling said King’s dissertation had been “scrupulously examined and reexamined by scholars,” and that “not a single instance of plagiarism of any sort has been identified. . . . not a single reader has ever found any nonattributed or misattributed quotations, misleading paraphrases, or thoughts borrowed without due scholarly reference in any of its 343 pages.” Hey, Jon, how long was your nose after you said all that? Claiborne Carson was director of the Project. He denied all charges until Waldman said he had a copy of Boozer’s dissertation. Then he caved. The story appeared on the front page of the Wall Street Journal on November 9, 1990. The article quoted Claiborne Carson finally admitting King’s plagiarism, but it calls his thievery “borrowings,” and “voice merging” that derives from the oral traditions of the black church. In other words, he was saying that thievery was a tradition of the black church, an intolerable insult. The article says that “most of King’s papers had many original thoughts,” but often “borrowed without citing,” According to Waldman, Carson was asking staff members to refrain from use of the “p” word at work. In short, even the author of the exposé leaned over backward far enough to do an Olympic flip. Compare this treatment to what you know would be done to anyone else – black, white or whatever – who commits misrepresentation as outrageous as King’s. He would be stripped of his degree. Look for instance at the case of Clifford Irving’s phony “biography” of Howard Hughes. Gerry Harbison was a professor of chemistry at the University of Nebraska. He was certainly not a “right-wing wacko.” He was full of praise for the “civil rights movement.” Professor Harbison is worth quoting at length: “Like most graduate students, King spent the first half of his doctoral work taking courses in his degree area, theology. His surviving papers from that period show that from the very beginning he was transcribing articles by eminent theologians, often word for word, and representing them as his own work. “After completing his course work, graduate students usually write a dissertation or thesis, supposedly an independent and original contribution to scholarship. King’s thesis was anything but original. In fact, the sheer extent of his plagiarism is breathtaking. Page after page contains nothing but direct, verbatim transcriptions of the work of others. In 1990, the King Project estimated that less than half of some chapters was actually written by King himself. Since then, even more of his ‘borrowings’ have been traced…CHRISTIANITY Now let’s look at King’s Christianity. He was a “Reverend.” He had a “doctorate” in theology. The man was as brilliant a theologian as Boston University’s Jack Boozer. Christianity, we are told, was the inspiration for everything he did. What did Martin Luther King believe?
Among the papers with his name on it is one entitled, “What Experiences of Christians Living in the Early Christian Century Led to the Christian Doctrines of the Divine Sonship of Jesus, the Virgin Birth, and the Bodily Resurrection.” The title itself tells us something is wrong. These doctrines came not from anyone’s “experience,” but from history and from what Jesus said. But, “Dr.” King comments, “these doctrines are historically and philosophically untenable.” (sic) Here is how Jesus got to be divine, according to “Dr.” King: “The first doctrine of our discussion which deals with the divine sonship of Jesus went through a great process of developement. (sic) . . . How then did this doctrine of divine sonship come into being? We may find a partial clue to the actual rise of this doctrine in the spreading of Christianity into the Greco-Roman world. . . . Anything that possessed flesh was always underminded (sic) in Greek thought. And so in order to receive inspiration from Jesus the Greeks had to apotheosize him. “. . . As Hedley laconically states, ‘the church had found God in Jesus, and so it called Jesus the Christ; and later under the influence of Greek thought-forms, the only begotten Son of God.'” In short, according to King, it was the Greeks who made Jesus “divine.” My guess is that King really did write this, because it is so incompetent. This is the writing of a mediocre high school sophomore, not a man about to receive a doctorate. Here is King on the virgin birth: “First we must admit that the evidence for the tenability of this doctrine is to (sic) shallow to convince any objective thinker . . . .” Finally, consider that the resurrection is the master doctrine of Christian belief. Catholics believe it. Protestants believe it. Without the resurrection, there is no Christianity; there is just another “wise man.” If you don’t believe in the resurrection, then go your way in peace, but you are not a Christian. So, what does “Dr.” King believe about the resurrection? “The last doctrine in our discussion deals with the resurrection story. This doctrine, upon which the Easter Faith rests, symbolizes the ultimate Christian conviction: that Christ conquered death. From a literary, historical, and philosophical point of view this doctrine raises many questions. In fact the external evidence for the authenticity of this doctrine is found wanting. . . .” According to King, the apostles made it all up because they loved Him so much. So, “Dr.” King was not a Christian. Along these lines, King was an ardent supporter of Planned Parenthood, the baby-killing racket, won their Margaret Sanger Award in 1966 and said “there is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger’s early efforts.” Mrs. Sanger’s early efforts included agitation to limit the procreation of the “inferior races” and publishing the work of Nazi propagandists. Were those the early efforts he meant? PROFLIGATE Finally, there was King’s career as a sexual predator. We are not just talking about a world-class philanderer like Jack Kennedy. We’re not just talking about Fiddle and Faddle in the White House and Marilyn Monroe. We’re talking about a genuine sexual psychopath. How do we know this? We know it because FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover tapped his telephones and bugged King’s activities. Why did Hoover do that? He did it because his boss, Attorney General Bobby Kennedy – a certified demigod in the illiberal pantheon – ordered him to. The Kennedys had become aware of King’s Communist activities and were worried. They brought him to the White House, where the President himself warned King that what he was doing could discredit them all. They wanted to know what he was up to, hence the wiretaps and bugs. What did they find out? Because the truth is so putrid, some of it has leaked. For instance, King was in Norway to accept the Nobel Prize. He spent the night before the ceremony chasing a woman naked down the hallway in his Oslo hotel. King was naked. I don’t know whether the woman was. A story in the Atlanta Journal, dated March 31, 1965, quoted Republican Congressman William Dickinson as saying that King participated in “all night sessions of debauchery” in a church. On the night before he was killed, King participated in another orgy. He hired prostitutes and paid for them with church money. He beat at least one of them up. Again, he wasn’t just a womanizer; he was a predator. He should have been in jail. At the request of Mrs. King, a court has sequestered all this evidence until the year 2027, long enough to milk everything possible from the myth. We share Mrs. King’s embarrassment. There are over 60,000 censored pages. Some of them have been released under the Freedom of Information Act; the rest has been labeled “obscene.” King’s own son says his father was killed in a “massive conspiracy” because his bizarre behavior, long-term depression andalcohol abuse had become a liability the killers couldn’t afford.
“Like all of you, I’m wondering what’s going to happen due to the vaccines over the next few months and years. It’s obvious that the only reason why California has opened up somewhat is because of the impending recall election. When that’s over and done with, no matter who wins, I would not be surprised to see the entire state go under another lockdown.”
by Mike Stone(henrymakow.com) The good news is that after a yearand five months of my being the only person – and I mean the only person – in my entire neighborhood walking the streets without a mask, I’m beginning to see others doing it. Over the last week, I estimate 5-10% of the people I pass on the street now are maskless. Even more good news is two of the places I shop for food have stopped requiring customers to wear masks. Today was the first day I learned about it. When a girl who works at one of those stores told me the good news, I exclaimed, “Thank God!” The bad news is I know the maskless people I see walking around almost certainly took the jab. After all, if they’ve been wearing a mask in public since February of last year, why would they suddenly remove it unless they volunteered for the needle?
Even more bad news is 90% or more of the people I see on the street and 80% of those I see driving cars are still wearing masks, even though I’m certain the majority of them have also taken the jab. And even more bad news: the L.A. School District is requiring all children to get jabbed in order to return to school. Can you imagine? The girl at the register who checked me out told me that while customers are no longer required to wear masks, all the employees are. “That’s too bad,” I said.
“Not really,” she responded. “It’s good to be safe. We don’t know who has been vaccinated.” I tell her, “You don’t have to worry about a thing. It’s all fake.” I can’t see her face behind her mask, but I can tell from the way her eyebrows arch up that I’m the first person who has ever mentioned that possibility to her.
Two weeks ago, I met a cute girl from Uganda. She’s the first person I’ve been able to hold an intelligent conversation with in over a year. Only when I tell her everything is fake, she exclaims, “Then why is everyone dying in Uganda?” Just like no one on earth actually knows anyone who supposedly died of the virus, I don’t know anyone who has died from taking the jab. I know seven or eight people who have now taken it. They range from a girl in her early 20s to a man in his late 70s. All of them appear fine, although one guy told me that after each of his shots he had to lie down in bed for three days, because “it really knocks you out.” Having said that, I’m aware of reports claiming over 10,000 jab deaths in this country alone. I just haven’t seen any. Apparently 90% of the NFL, both players and coaches, are being forced (conned) into getting jabbed. Will we see them dropping like flies? Are they getting the same jab as everyone else? Who knows what the truth is anymore?
In my case, I ordered food to go from a restaurant and was told by the cashier that all the employees there got the jab. Two days after eating their food, I noticed a small bump on my head. It’s under my hair and I can’t see it, but I can feel it. Three weeks later, it’s still there. Coincidence? Should I begin drinking pine needle tea? (Intro par beside image was here) What’s left of my family and friends have splintered into two groups: a small handful who see the writing on the wall and have dedicated the remainder of their lives to saving their souls, and the large majority who are completely oblivious to anything that’s happened over the last year and a half and are absolutely giddy about being able to go to Las Vegas and Disneyland. Their stupidity is mind boggling to behold. At this point, I’m torn between trying to educate people and just letting them go. If they want to swirl down the drain into oblivion, that’s their choice. I just hate to see it. What’s funny – or not – is they all think I’m the dumb one. Am I? —–Mike Stone is the author of Based, a young adult novel about race, dating and growing up in America, and A New America, the first novel of the Alt-Right, a dark comedy set on Election Day 2016 in Los Angeles – – Available on Amazon.
