The slogan became popular about ten years ago: the revolution will be decentralized with the creation of robust parallel institutions. There is no other path. The intellectual parlor game is over. This is a real-life struggle for freedom itself. It’s resist and rebuild or doom.
Did Lockdowns Set a Global Revolt in Motion? Continue Reading
In so many words—and data—CDC has quietly admitted that all of the indignities of the Covid-19 pandemic management have failed: the masks, the distancing, the lockdowns, the closures, especially the vaccines, all of it failed to control the pandemic.
CDC Quietly Admits to Covid Policy Failures Continue Reading
People we’ve been led to believe are “learned” are actually shockingly ignorant (or plain evil). But these people will still be leading these organizations tomorrow and 10 years from today. I didn’t know this knowledge would cause me to have recurring nightmares, but it has. My dream’s definitely telling me to write about this, which I’ve now done. Maybe I’ll now get a peaceful night’s sleep.
It would be unforgivable for the public not to be given more clarity on this important issue. We must see the full detail of what we are being signed up to. The time to speak up about it is now, rather than after the event. If there is nothing for the government and the WHO to hide, they should disclose this information. The British public has a right to know and we should be given an opportunity to either accept or reject what is being proposed behind closed doors.
Continuously conflating the concept of pandemic preparedness and PHEIC only creates confusion while obscuring the obvious political processes involved. If the WHO wants to convince the world to prepare for pandemics, and calm down fears of potential misuse of the pandemic label via a new governance process, then they need to provide clarity on what they are actually talking about.
Exactly What Are WHO Member States Voting for? Continue Reading
In a nutshell, it means that this unelected organisation would have the authority to proclaim lockdowns and ‘medical (or health) emergencies,’ as well as mandatory ‘vaccinations’ at the whim of the WHO’s Director-General, reducing the freedom to traverse space freely to ironclad spatial confinement in one fell swoop. This is what ‘total terror’ would mean. It is my fervent hope that something can still be done to avert this imminent nightmare.
The enemies of humanity want us to prevent us from hating the bad and loving the good by making us afraid of being accused of hatred. In a world in crisis because our leaders are bad, our food is bad, our medicine and public health are bad, our schools are bad, our broken families are bad, our entertainment and music is bad, our infrastructure is bad, inflation is bad, and even the adjudication of dangerous and violent criminals in our major cities is bad, silence and self-censorship become a most dangerous refusal to love the good, to love neighbor, and ultimately to love God.
The drafting of the Open Letter below, addressing these issues, was led by three lawyers with experience with the WHO, within the UN and in international treaty law, Silvia Behrendt, Assoc. Prof Amrei Muller, and Dr. Thi Thuy Van Dinh. It simply calls upon the WHO and Member States to extend the deadline for the adoption of the amendments to the International Health Regulations and a new Pandemic Agreement at the 77th WHA to safeguard the rule of law and equity. To proceed with the current deadline, against their own legal requirements, would not just be legally wrong but demonstrate unequivocally that equity and respect for States rights have nothing to do with the WHO’s pandemic agenda.
For the sake of freedom, for the sake of vibrant and meaningful living, and for the sake of that very chaos and unpredictability that, in and of itself, provides the soil and the nutrients for beautiful variety to grow — we need to accept that there will always be holes and inefficiencies in our attempts to optimize our lives. And if someone pushes us to micromanage that precious negative space, that’s usually a sign that they are seeing us as resources, and that they do not, in fact, have our best interests at heart.
How long until centre-right political leaders across the Western democracies grasp the truth that the cultural hegemony is not as crushingly successful as believed by the elites? Without embracing populism, they can still address the practical concerns, interests, and aspirations that animate working and middle class people worried by cost of living pressures, breakdowns of family and social cohesion, and retreat from pride in flag, country, and religion. These majority voting cohorts are worried about mass immigration, the erosion of women’s rights under the relentless assault from trans activists, and the absolutist agenda of Net Zero and damn the costs.
The majority of the court appeared to favor eliminating Chevron. It would be the height of hypocrisy – and one the most culturally devastating decisions since Dred Scott – to not see the parallels and to rule any other way than against the government in Murthy. With that ruling, we can begin to gather in the tentacles of the censorship monster.
Your name is important. To renounce it or change it is momentous. To be given a new secret name by an intimate partner is sublime. Imagine a new name, known only to you, carved on a white stone, handed only to you. How precious that would be. For now, each of has the name we have. If we don’t use it, who will?
Search 4,000+ articles & events
