Lew Rockwell Institute

America is faced with serious problems that require immediate action. Illegal immigrants are committing horrible crimes. “Woke” programs are entrenched in our schools, from elementary schools through universities. Judges are abusing their powers in order to block President Trump from cutting the budget and firing federal employees. Some people respond to this dire situation by demanding more power for the president. We must have government by executive order, they say. Is dictatorship such a terrible word? Not if it is for the right cause.

This talk is dangerous nonsense and goes against sound Rothbardian doctrine. The modern institution of the presidency is the primary political evil Americans face, and the cause of nearly all our woes. It squanders the national wealth and starts unjust wars against foreign peoples that have never done us any harm. It wrecks our families, tramples on our rights, invades our communities, and spies on our bank accounts. It skews the culture toward decadence and trash. It tells lie after lie. Teachers used to tell school kids that anyone can be president. This is like saying anyone can go to Hell. It’s not an inspiration; it’s a threat.

The presidency—by which I mean the executive State—is the sum total of American tyranny. The other branches of government, including the presidentially appointed Supreme Court, are mere adjuncts. The presidency insists on complete devotion and humble submission to its dictates, even while it steals the products of our labor and drives us into economic ruin. It centralizes all power unto itself, and crowds out all competing centers of power in society, including the church, the family, business, charity, and the community. I’ll go further. The US presidency is the world’s leading evil. It is the chief mischief-maker in every part of the globe, the leading wrecker of nations, the usurer behind Third World debt, the bailer-out of corrupt governments, the hand in many dictatorial gloves, the sponsor and sustainer of the New World Order, of wars, interstate and civil, of famine and disease. To see the evils caused by the presidency, look no further than Iraq or Serbia, where the lives of innocents were snuffed out in pointless wars, where bombing was designed to destroy civilian infrastructure and cause disease, and where women, children, and the aged were denied essential food and medicine because of a cruel embargo. Look at the human toll taken by the presidency, from Dresden and Hiroshima to Waco and Ruby Ridge, and you see a prime practitioner of murder by government.

As the presidency assumes ever more power unto itself, it becomes less and less accountable and more and more tyrannical. These days, when we say the federal government, what we really mean is the presidency. When we say national priorities, we really mean what the presidency wants. When we say national culture, we mean what the presidency funds and imposes.

The presidency is presumed to be the embodiment of Rousseau’s general will, with far more power than any monarch or head of state in pre-modern societies. The US presidency is the apex of the world’s biggest and most powerful government and of the most expansive empire in world history. As such, the presidency represents the opposite of freedom. It is what stands between us and our goal of restoring our ancient rights.

And let me be clear: I’m not talking about any particular inhabitant of the White House. I’m talking about the institution itself, and the millions of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who are its acolytes. Look through the US government manual, which breaks down the federal establishment into its three branches. What you actually see is the presidential trunk, its Supreme Court stick, and its congressional twig. Practically everything we think of as federal—save the Library of Congress—operates under the aegis of the executive.

The libraries are filled with shelf after shelf of treatises on the American presidency. Save yourself some time, and don’t bother with them. Virtually all tell the same hagiographic story. Whether written by liberals or conservatives, they serve up the identical Whiggish pap: the history of the presidency is the story of a great and glorious institution. It was opposed early on, and viciously so, by the anti-federalists, and later, even more viciously, by Southern Confederates. But it has been heroically championed by every respectable person since the beginning of the republic.

The office of the presidency, the conventional wisdom continues, has changed not at all in substance, but has grown in stature, responsibility, and importance, to fulfill its unique mission on earth. As the duties of the office have grown, so has the greatness of the men who inhabit it. Each stands on the shoulders of his forerunners, and, inspired by their vision and decisiveness, goes on to make his own contribution to the ever-expanding magisterium of presidential laws, executive orders, and national security findings.

When there is a low ebb in the accumulation of power, it is seen as the fault of the individual and not the office. Thus the so-called postage-stamp presidents between Lincoln and Wilson are to be faulted for not following the glorious example set by Abe. They had a vast reservoir of power, but were mysteriously reluctant to use it. Fortunately that situation was resolved, by Wilson especially, and we moved onward and upward into the light of the present day. And every one of these books ends with the same conclusion: the US presidency has served us well.

The presidency is seemingly bound by law, but in practice it can do just about anything it pleases. It can order up troops anywhere in the world, just as  Obama, brain-dead Biden, and no Trump have done.It can plow up a religious community in Texas and bury its members because they got on somebody’s nerves at the Justice Department. It can tap our phones, read our mail, watch our bank accounts, and tell us what we can and cannot eat, drink, and smoke.

The presidency can break up businesses, shut down airlines, void drilling leases, bribe foreign heads of state or arrest them and try them in kangaroo courts, nationalize land, engage in germ warfare, firebomb crops in Colombia, overthrow any government anywhere, erect tariffs, round up and discredit any public or private assembly it chooses, grab our guns, tax our incomes and our inheritances, steal our land, centrally plan the national and world economy, and impose embargoes on anything anytime. No prince or pope ever had this ability.

Of course, none of the conventional bilge accords with reality. The US president is the worst outgrowth of a badly flawed constitution, imposed in a sort of coup against the Articles of Confederation. Even from the beginning, the presidency was accorded too much power. Indeed, an honest history would have to admit that the presidency has always been an instrument of oppression, from the Whiskey Rebellion to the War on Tobacco.

The presidency has systematically stolen the liberty won through the secession from Britain. From Jackson and Lincoln to McKinley and Roosevelt Junior, from Wilson and FDR to Truman and Kennedy, from Nixon and Reagan to Bush and Clinton, from Obama to Biden to Trump, it has been the means by which our rights to liberty, property, and self-government have been suppressed.

I can count on one hand the actions of presidents that actually favored the true American cause, meaning liberty. The overwhelming history of the presidency is a tale of overthrown rights and liberties, and the erection of despotism in their stead.

Conservatives used to understand this. In the last century, all the great political philosophers—men like John Randolph and John Taylor and John C. Calhoun—did. In this century, the Right was born in reaction to the imperial presidency. Men like Albert Jay Nock, Garet Garrett, John T. Flynn, and Felix Morley called the FDR presidency what it was: a US version of the dictatorships that arose in Russia and Germany, and a profound evil draining away the very life of the nation. They understood that FDR had brought both the Congress and the Supreme Court under his control, for purposes of power, national socialism, and war. He shredded what was left of the Constitution, and set the stage for all the consolidation that followed. Later presidents were free to nationalize the public schools, administer the economy according to the dictates of crackpot Keynesian economists, tell us who we must and who we must not associate with, nationalize the police function, and run an egalitarian regime that extols nondiscrimination as the sole moral tenet, when it is clearly not a moral tenet at all.

Let’s do everything we can to keep the presidency weak and to preserve the rule of law. Even if Trump does some things we like, he does many other thigs we dislike; and, if we have a powerful executive, the next “woke” president can drive us further down the road to ruin. And the next neocon president can unleash a nuclear war that will destroy the world.

The post Why We Need the Rule of Law appeared first on LewRockwell.

Consuming more of this Ultra-Processed World is not a path to “the good life,” it’s a path to the destruction and derangement of an Ultra-Processed Life.

The digital realm, finance, and junk food have something in common: they’re all ultra-processed, synthetic versions of Nature that have been designed to be compellingly addictive, to the detriment of our health and quality of life.

In focusing on the digital realm, money (i.e. finance, “growth,” consuming more as the measure of all that is good) and eating more of what tastes good, we now have an Ultra-Processed Life. All three– the digital realm, money in all its manifestations and junk food–are all consumed: they all taste good, i.e. generate endorphin hits, and so they draw us into their synthetic Ultra-Processed World.

We’re so busy consuming that we don’t realize they’re consuming us: in focusing on producing and consuming more goods and services as the sole measure of “the good life,” it’s never enough: if we pile up $1 million, we focus on piling up $2 million. If we pile up $2 million, we focus on accumulating $3 million. And so on, in every manifestation of money and consumption.

The digital realm consumes our lives one minute and one hour at a time, for every minute spent focusing on a screen is a minute taken from the real world, which is the only true measure of the quality of our life.

Ultra-processed food is edible, but it isn’t nutritious. It tastes good, but it harms us in complex ways we don’t fully understand.

This is the core dynamic of the synthetic “products and services” that dominate modern life: the harm they unleash is hidden beneath a constant flow of endorphin hits, distractions, addictive media and unfilled hunger for all that is lacking in our synthetic Ultra-Processed World: a sense of security, a sense of control, a sense of being grounded, and the absence of a hunger to find synthetic comforts in a world stripped of natural comforts.

In effect, we’re hungry ghosts in this Ultra-Processed World, unable to satisfy our authentic needs in a synthetic world of artifice and inauthenticity. The more we consume, the hungrier we become for what is unavailable in an Ultra-Processed Life.

We’re told there’s no upper limit on “growth” of GDP, wealth, abundance, finance or consumption, but this is a form of insanity, for none of this “growth” addresses what’s lacking and what’s broken in our lives, the derangements generated by consuming (and being consumed by) highly profitable synthetic versions of the real world.

Insanity is often described as doing the same thing and expecting a different result. So our financial system inflates yet another credit-asset bubble and we expect that this bubble won’t pop, laying waste to everyone who believed that doing the same thing would magically generate a different result.

But there is another form of insanity that’s easily confused with denial: we are blind to the artificial nature of this Ultra-Processed World and blind to its causal mechanisms: there is only one possible output of this synthetic version of Nature, and that output is a complex tangle of derangements that we seek to resolve by dulling the pain of living a deranged life.

We’re not in denial; we literally don’t see our Ultra-Processed World for what it is: a manufactured mirror world of commoditized derangements and distortions that have consumed us so completely that we’ve lost the ability to see what’s been lost.

Ultra-processed snacks offer the perfect metaphor. We can’t stop consuming more, yet the more we consume the greater the damage to our health. The worse we feel, the more we eat to distract ourselves, to get that comforting endorphin hit. It’s a feedback loop that ends in the destruction of our health and life.

Once we’ve been consumed by money, the digital realm and ultra-processed foods, we’ve lost the taste for the real world. A fresh raw carrot is sweet, but once we’re consuming a diet of sugary cold cereals and other equivalents of candy, we no longer taste the natural sweetness of a carrot; it’s been lost in the rush of synthetic extremes of salt, sugar and fat that make ultra-processed foods so addictive. To recover the taste of real food, we first have to completely abandon ultra-processed foods– Go Cold Turkey.

Raed the Whole Article

The post Ultra-Processed Life appeared first on LewRockwell.

Loyola University of Chicago used to have a law school professor named George Anastaplo.

I learned about him in my late teens through a long piece in The Chicago Tribune Sunday magazine, which was written before most newspaper journalism turned into irredeemable garbage.

I think it if fair to say he is someone who the informed readers of these pages should want to know. I wanted to know him better, so I showed up at his office one day.

Anastaplo was the brilliant and stubborn son of Greek immigrants. He came of age during World War Two. After serving as a B-17 and B-29 navigator in Europe during the war, he came back and graduated with a law degree from the University of Chicago.

When asked during the Illinois State Bar Association application process if someone who was a member of the Communist Party should be admitted to practice law, he answered, “Yes.” When questioned further, he explained that the belief in revolution was a founding premise of America, citing the Declaration of Independence. He said free association was a premise of the First Amendment to the US Constitution and that no one should be asked about their political affiliation in order to be a lawyer. It is worth noting that since the state bar association had a state-provided monopoly with total control over who could practice law in Illinois, this policy was as good as government asking about political affiliation in order to be admitted to practice law.

Anastaplo’s law school classmates who agreed with him simply said whatever they needed to say in order to get their law licenses and move on with life. Anastaplo effectively threw away his law career by taking this stand. He actually ended up driving a taxi to make ends meet. And he wasn’t even a communist. He was, in fact, quite the patriotic American.

He just thought the questions were a lousy thing to ask in an allegedly free country. He took the matter over the next ten years through the court system and eventually lost his case In re Anastaplo at the US Supreme Court.

Justice Hugo Black wrote the dissenting opinion. After reading it, Justice William Brennan told Black that his opinion would “immortalize Anastaplo.” Part of this opinion was read at Black’s funeral in 1971. The last line of the opinion was, “We must not be afraid to be free.” The dissenting opinion used to be required reading in my classes when I taught material covering that period.

I believe the Mises Institute, one of my favorite non-profit organizations, exists partly to inspire young men and young women to be more like Anastaplo and to fight the principled fight regardless of the cost. I like people who stand on principle, even if I am not in total agreement with them. I like organizations that do the same. On top of it, Anastaplo had such a keen and hungry mind that allowed him to see all angles of an argument, rather than just being one who blindly followed. As far as the students of Leo Strauss go, the father of American neo-conservatism, there are few students who I have encountered who I truly appreciate. Anastaplo is my favorite. There are aspects of Anastaplo’s life and his intellectual influences that I do not agree with. There are other aspects that I find totally inspiring.

The Chicago Tribune piece that I read those years ago had some life advice from Anastaplo, “Avoid specialization too early in your careers. Allow principles to guide your decisions, even in the face of fear or ignorance. Act prudently; behave honorably. Buy a subscription to the symphony to enlarge your world. Know Shakespeare. Be a student all your life.” (emphasis added)

This advice stood out from the rest of the article. Shakespeare? Symphony? What could these possibly have to do with being a freedom fighter? What could these possibly have to do with living the principled life?

One of Europe’s many gifts to the world is classical music. There is beauty in classical music. I will list a few thoughts around why beauty is good and worthy of pursuit.

1.) There is beauty in the world.

2.) Aesthetics matter. They remind us that life doesn’t suck.

3.) There is ugliness in the world. If you do not stop to curate what you choose to be exposed to during the day, your life will be filled with the ugly.

4.) Beauty is worth fighting for.

5.) Beauty is worth spending time on.

6.) Beauty is worth pausing your day for. One a day is set in motion, there are few who are flexible enough to pause when the moment truly calls for it.

7.) Beauty is worth paying for. Those who are cantankerous will fight at a moment’s notice, and will waste their time at a moment’s notice, but expect them to spend a dime on the thing that they will spend time and spill blood over, and they suddenly look much less principled, because they will then cantankerously fight will all their energy to hold on to their precious shekels.

8.) Beauty reminds that you are not just a worker drone.

9.) Beauty reminds that you are not just a slavish consumer. Virtually all channels of communication have turned into insistence that you be a slavish consumer. Don’t fall for it. Yes, buy things of value to you, but do so thoughtfully, prayerfully. They think they can get you to drink Pepsi with your next meal if they just say that word 8 times in front of you in the next 4 hours. Don’t be the marketing con man’s easy mark.

10.) Beauty inspires more creation of beauty. It inspires the creative mind to go create. It inspires the uncreative mind to contemplate that he too can create. It has potential to make the mind fecund, fertile, even prolifically so. This can be a reason that beauty can easily turn into an object of worship, but it should not be. It is but a gift. It is the Gift Giver (James 1:17) who is worthy of worship.

So, given the fact that a brilliant man in my youth spoke these words to me through a journalist, and then elaborated upon them in person, and convinced me that I needed a symphony subsection and more Shakespeare in my life, I tend to pursue those things every chance I get. I am not shy about welcoming others to join me either, since I know how edifying such activities can be.

I will be going to the symphony next weekend in Chicago. Those readers who are on my daily email list are invited. If you joined my daily email list, you could perhaps come too. But I don’t necessarily want to push you to do that. It might not be right for you for a variety of reasons. What I do however want to push you to do is this: Go to the symphony. Have a subscription.

Another of Europe’s gifts to the world is the work of William Shakespeare. Anastaplo is right that one should know Shakespeare. I had to read 7 or 8 Shakespeare plays aloud with a group of people on Tuesday nights, 3 or 4 hours at a time, before I finally started to be able to penetrate the language. Once the language is penetrated, the work is brimming with so much wisdom and beauty that it so often repays the one who takes the time, to read, re-read, and even memorize. From the St. Crispin’s Day Speech, to the sonnets, how glad I am to have a repository of that knowledge in my head.

The King James Bible specifically and the Bible in general requires similar repetitive reading before one can begin to penetrate the language and to begin to recognize the beauty contained within the language on paper. It is the only English language text that I have found more beneficial than Shakespeare to read, re-read, and memorize.

Similarly, in regards to repetition, I had to attend the symphony every week for some time before I finally got into a rhythm and began to understand the music. My favorite way to do so is to come with paper and pen and to write as the performance takes place. Some of my most passionate and beautiful writing has happened at the symphony. It took me time to understand that. There have been years when I have volunteered at the symphony to have exposure to more music, years when I had more than one symphony subscription and have dragged friends along, or years when I have multiple times each week attended. When you submerge yourself in brilliance and beauty, that brilliance and beauty refined through you, starts to come out of you.

I love listening to classical music in digital format but it is no replacement for feeling the tympani boom through your chest, to watch the aria mellow the entire room, to hear the collective sigh as the strings quiet down leaving a tension in the air broken by the triangle.

I did not always see that beauty, nor have that appreciation, but it has to start somewhere, and I think if you do not have that appreciation, today is the day to start with it.

There is beauty in the world. You must not forget that. Dear reader, you must not forget that. Dear woman of letters, you must not forget that. Dear man of ideas, you must not forget that. There is beauty in the world.

Get on the California Zephyr and sit in the observation car. Why? Because it’s beautiful. It’s not efficient. It’s not especially comfortable. It’s not fast, nor is it reliable. It’s beautiful to take the California Zephyr from San Francisco to Chicago.

Get three friends together and act out Troilus and Cressida. Why? Because it’s beautiful. It’s not efficient. It’s not especially comfortable. It’s not fast. It’s beautiful to spend your evening reading Shakespeare aloud in a small group.

Get online and find tickets for the next performance of classical music in your area. Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony would be a treasure. Or Vivaldi’s Four Seasons. And while classics known to you may be played, hopefully you will have a chance at something lesser known and equally beautiful, as well. Why? Because it’s beautiful. It’s not efficient. It’s not especially comfortable. It’s not fast. It’s beautiful to spend your evening listening to classical music in a symphony hall.

It will enrich the soul in ways you cannot even imagine. It will enrich your mind and impact your life. Cherish the beautiful. Stop hurrying. Stop doing what is popular. Stop bowing down to the god of efficiency. Seek that which is beautiful. Cherish it.

And not just once. But often. Break through the learning curve and make it part of your life. Make the pursuit of beauty a part of your life.

That is one of modernity’s great gifts. The technology is helpful. The efficiency is helpful. Technology for technology’s sake and efficiency for efficiency’s sake is a deep and worthless pit. Efficiency that makes more time for that which you love, technology that makes more time for that which you love, that is good. Embrace beauty. Either find beauty in all that you do or change what you do. So much of life depends on your ability to stop ceaselessly doing and to be able to pause and recognize beauty in your midst and to appreciate it for what it is.

Why? Not because it is efficient. Not because it is especially comfortable. Not because it is fast. But because it is beautiful.

The post Why You Should Either Come With Me Or Go on Your Own to the Symphony appeared first on LewRockwell.

It has long been a commonplace among commentators of the Confessions that the first nine books are about Augustine’s ardent search for truth, leaving reflections on its meaning for the remaining four books. In other words, now that he’s determined to cleave to Christ, to commune with Him in the most intimate way in the life of the Church, certain implications follow which Augustine is only too eager to flesh out over the course of the final number of books.

Putting it another way, one could say that while the first nine tell the story of his conversion, including the major bumps along the way, the last four focus on various applications thereof. For instance, the use of memory (Book X); the problem of time (Book XI); unpacking Genesis (Book XII); further exposition of Genesis (Book XIII).

Meanwhile, with Book IX what we have is a description of everything that has happened to Augustine since his conversion. These are the events of real and compelling importance which transpired in the immediate period following his dramatic turn to God, to Jesus Christ, and to the Church He founded, of which there are several worth taking a look at.

Two of them, by the way, happen almost at once, beginning with Augustine’s resignation as a teacher of Rhetoric, followed by his retirement to the country for a life of prayer and study. Concerning the first, his professorial post, he writes to the people of Milan, “notifying them that they must find another vender of words for their students.” And then, as always, he acknowledges before God: “The deed was done, and you rescued my tongue, as you had already rescued my heart.”

At the same time, he and a handful of others elect to leave the public life altogether, sequestering themselves outside Milan for a more single-minded pursuit of the contemplative life. “Once we were there,” he tells God, “I began at last to serve you with my pen.” Which he proceeds to do, drawing upon a number of the psalms for nourishment and inspiration. “How I cried out to you, my God, when I read the Psalms of David, those hymns of faith, those songs of a pious heart in which the spirit of pride can find no place!”

“How they set me on fire with love of you!” he continues, very much in the same rhapsodic vein. “I was burning to echo them to all the world, if only I could, so that they might vanquish man’s pride.” He reads on, quoting from Psalm 4: “Tremble and sin no more,” which, he tells God, moves him deeply, “because now I had learnt to tremble for my past, so that in future I might sin no more. And it was right that I should tremble,” he adds, recalling years spent inoculated against the truth of God and His creation because it was not some other nature belonging to the tribe of darkness that had sinned in me, as the Manichees pretend. They do not tremble, but “they store up retribution for themselves against the day of retribution, when God will reveal the justice of His judgments.”

Yes, the love of God ignites no end of fire in Augustine’s heart. And yet, at the same time, it leaves him little possibility of spreading that fire to others. All those “dead corpses,” he calls them, of whom I had myself been one. For I had been evil as the plague. Like a cur I had snarled blindly and bitterly against the Scriptures, which are sweet with the honey of heaven and radiant with your light. And now I was sick at heart over the rebellion of those who hate them. (citing Psalm 138)

He will soon need the grace of baptism to heal his heart, which is another of those salient events that follow his conversion. And when at last it comes, it fills him with a certitude of joy he had never felt before. “All anxiety over the past melted away,” he reports, for I was lost in wonder and joy, meditating upon your far-reaching providence for the salvation of the human race…The music surged in my ears, truth seeped into my heart, and my feelings of devotion overflowed, so that the tears streamed down. But they were tears of gladness.

Soon thereafter, Augustine, along with Monica, his mother, and several others, leave Milan for the long journey home, stopping at Ostia, at the mouth of the Tiber, along the way. It is there that Monica will die, an event on which Augustine will dilate for the balance of Book IX, omitting not a word, he says, “that my mind can bring to birth concerning your servant, my mother. In the flesh she brought me to birth in this world: in her heart she brought me to birth in your eternal light.”

Clearly, after God, it is to Monica his mother that Augustine owes everything. And he heaps upon every memory he has of her, of the great goodness of her life and example, all possible praise. Including the fact that in the days before her death, having at last seen her prayers answered, and thus nothing more remains to be done before taking leave of this world, she tells him that she no longer wishes her body to be returned to Africa for burial in her native soil, despite an earlier and oft-repeated anxiety that she lie alongside her husband in the grave she had prepared for herself.

“You will bury your mother here,” she tells him. “It does not matter where you bury my body. Do not let that worry you! All I ask of you is that, wherever you may be, you should remember me at the altar of the Lord.”

Read the Whole Article

The post Augustine the Saint appeared first on LewRockwell.

Readers of LRC have long been treated to dissertations from the Midwestern Doctor that run counter to the medical ‘Conventional Wisdom’. I myself suffered through many years of seeing poor quality medical research. I was hired by an elite private medical center in 1999 specifically to fix the Clinical Trials software purchased from another elite private medical center but were unable to deploy because it did not work. It was my introduction to research in the medical world. Disclaimer: I do not now and never had have a phd, but I am good at applied mathematics and do know how to make computer systems work. I have spent a fair portion of my professional life in research. This was the background I brought to medicine; math, computers and  total lack of healthcare knowledge beyond finding my doctor’s office. What I learned in the first fifteen years was eye opening and not in a good way.

Jakob Bernoulli was an 18th century Swiss mathematician that first recognized that statistical correlation is not causation. It was named after him Bernoulli’s Fallacy. There is a superb book on this topic on Amazon; well worth the $30 cost. Here is a great example of the correlation issue: all criminals breathe oxygen thus anyone that breathes oxygen is a criminal. Clearly bad logic. The correlation is criminals and breathing oxygen; the illogic is equating breathing oxygen with criminality. What Bernoulli was really saying is look at the data and draw conclusions from it. This is also known as Bayesian statistics. Not doing this is the province of speculation a fancy word for guessing.

I soon learned that modern medicine has ‘biostatistics’. After a little research I realized why: mathematical statistics is a rigorous discipline based upon proof. The diamond hard concept that all of math, physics and engineering are based upon. Biostatistics are not rigorous mathematics in fact just the opposite. It is solutions in search of problems. It is literally the reification of Bernoulli’s Fallacy that Naomi Wolf, a Rhodes Scholar at New College Oxford, is a superb author but may not have a mathematical bone in her body nonetheless her book The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity is literally all about how correlation isn’t sound science by any stretch of the imagination. In the case of COVID-19 bad science equates with bad outcomes. Outcomes are the only criteria any medical treatment or drug must be measured against using Bayesian Statistics not what the Congress, a Big Pharma CEO, their Board’s of Directors and marketing department dreamed was true.

Medical biostatistics is literally the worst offender when it comes to Bernoulli’s Fallacy. It’s riddled with p-hacking aka data dredging, publication bias, and overreliance on frequentist methods, which often treat statistical significance as proof of causation rather than just as an observation.

The Problem: Correlation ≠ Causation

• Most medical research relies on observational studies, which inherently suffer from confounding variables.
• Even randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often misinterpreted because they don’t prove causation; they just reduce bias in correlation measurements.
• P-values are the worst culprits. If p < 0.05, researchers treat results as “significant,” ignoring Bayesian probability and effect sizes.

Example: The Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) Disaster

• In the 1980s and 1990s, studies showed that women on HRT had lower rates of heart disease.
• Doctors assumed HRT prevented heart disease and prescribed it widely.
• Later RCTs showed no protective effect—the correlation was due to wealthier, healthier women choosing HRT (confounding factor).

Modern Biostatistics Still Falls for This

• COVID-19 Studies: Many studies used relative risk reduction (RRR) instead of absolute risk reduction (ARR), misleading the public about vaccine efficacy.
• Nutrition Studies: Coffee is bad for you. Wait, no, coffee is good for you. Nutritional epidemiology is a dumpster fire of correlation-based claims.
• Genetic Research: GWAS (Genome-Wide Association Studies) link genes to diseases, but they rarely prove a causal mechanism.

The Fix? Bayesian Thinking

• Instead of p-values, use Bayesian credible intervals—but frequentist stats dominate because they are easier to publish and explain.
• Mendelian randomization tries to fix correlation issues, but it’s not foolproof.
• More RCTs, fewer observational studies—but funding biases favor quick, cheap correlations.

This is my opinion, buyt based on my experience modern medical research is not based upon Bayesian probability and statistics thus any results from biostatistic’s might be taken with a grain of salt, possibly even the whole shaker’s worth. When you understand Bernoulli’s Fallacy and the difference between statistical significance and the errors inherent in using correlation as causation we come upon the gross problem with so much of medical research.

Researchers have a disquieting tendency to find what they were looking for. The window they see through when looking is the correlation/causation dichotomy. President Trump is a lot of things but I would bet all my bitcoin that he is not a mathematician. President Biden might not have even been conscious during 2021 and it is for this reason that bad science and ruthless marketing led to billions of taxpayer dollars going straight into Big Pharma’s pockets while potentially creating millions of cripples around the world for a non-solution to a non-problem. That is where the data leads.

The post On Medical Fallacy appeared first on LewRockwell.

A significant amount of US military power has been on the move over this past week, including several B-2 strategic bombers which have landed at the US military base in Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean just over 2,000 miles southeast of Iran. According to press reports this is the most significant B-2 presence on the Island in nearly half a decade. In addition flight trackers are showing increased activity by at least nine KC-135R refueling aircraft in the region. Several C-17 cargo planes have also been spotted by satellites on the Island.

The US President has ordered US Carrier Strike Group Carl Vinson to the Mideast.

While the Administration continues to escalate its illegal bombing campaign against Yemen – some are reporting more than 60 strikes today alone and President Trump promises that they will continue “for a long time” – speculation is increasing that the Diego Garcia build-up is the beginning of the long process of positioning US military muscle for an attack on Iran.

President Trump today warned although his “big preference is we work it out with Iran…if we don’t work it out, bad bad things are gonna happen with Iran.”

So is the US president elected with the promise to end wars rather than start them ready to launch a war against the modern, technologically-advanced nation of 90 million with an extremely complicated terrain, advanced military capabilities, and a newly-signed strategic partnership treaty with Russia?

No one knows.

Congress seems uninterested in its Constitutional obligation to serve as the red light or green light for war – there has been nary a peep over Trump’s bombing of Yemen to, as his top aides were caught saying, “send a message.” Does anyone believe they will come out of their slumber as Hegseth, Waltz, Rubio, and the rest of the gang that couldn’t shoot straight (or at least plan a war on Signal straight) position the US for an attack on Iran?

Trump has continued – and perhaps even accelerated – in his second term a pattern of extreme rhetorical escalation followed by retrenchment possibly as a means of gaining the attention of the party he is addressing. For example he warned Russia earlier this month that he would increase sanctions and destroy its economy before backing down to a series of lengthy phone calls and lately capitulating to all of Russia’s demands.

So is this a big bluff to get Tehran back to negotiate the deal that Trump himself abrogated when he took office the first time? (And if so, why would Iran trust Washington this time)? Or will Trump (again) heed the call of Israel’s Netanyahu and expend US blood and treasure to take out Israel’s enemies?

Already Trump’s top picks, including his ambassador to Tel Aviv Mike Huckabee who is doing his best Colin Powell impression – claiming that as soon as Iran takes out Tel Aviv it will turn its sights to Tennessee – are urging action against “the head of the snake” as Bibi is wont to describe Iran. The pieces are falling into place and Trump’s entire cabinet is chock full of individuals for whom a war with Iran is the single most important item on the foreign policy agenda.

As analyst William Schryver points out, Iran is certainly not Yemen, Afghanistan, Saddam’s Iraq, Gaddafi’s Libya, or Noriega’s Panama. The United States under four years of mismanagement by whoever was acting as Biden’s brain has already thrown everything it had available in attempt to secure a strategic defeat for Russia and lost. The DC neocons move from failure to failure without skipping a beat, even as the US economy is bled dry by the war machine.

This war would be the end of Trump’s presidency and could well be the end of the US economy itself. All for an outrageous domino theory presented by (to a large degree) US religious extremists not unlike the religious extremists they claim to oppose abroad – that Tehran is seeking to “take over” the United States. It’s bonkers…yet for those of us who spend decades watching US foreign policy bonkers usually wins the day. Strap in…

Reprinted with permission from The Ron Paul Institute.

The post Diego Garcia Smells Like War appeared first on LewRockwell.

I was impressed by Elon Musk’s fine more moral sensibility in his recent interview with Fox News Brett Baier.

BAIER: Democratic Arizona Senator Mark Kelly posted on X about his trip to Ukraine to push for continuing to send US weapons and support there, and you posted that he was a traitor. Why do that?

MUSK: Well I think somebody should care about the interests of the Untied States above the interests of another country, and if they don’t, they’re a traitor.

BAIER: [Kelly] is a decorated veteran, a former astronaut, a sitting US senator.”

MUSK: It doesn’t mean it’s ok for him to put the interests of another country above America.

MUSK: We should have empathy for the thousands of people dying everyday in the trenches. For no movement in the lines. For the past two years thousands of people have died every week for nothing. … I take great offense at those who put the appearance of goodness over the reality of it. Those who virtue signal and say we can’t give into Russia, but have no solution to stopping thousands of kids dying every day. … I have contempt for such people and I want to make that clear. Because they’re virtue signaling and their lack of a solution means that kids don’t have a father. It means parents lost a son. For what? Nothing.

Baier’s remark that Kelly is a “decorated veteran” was a reference to Kelly’s service as a Naval aviator during the Gulf War. He flew 39 combat missions off the USS Midway carrier in an A-6E intruder attack aircraft, used primarily for dropping ordnance on enemy targets. He served as part of the coalition’s air campaign against the Iraqi army in which the U.S and it allies flew more than 116,000 combat air sorties and dropped 88,500 tons of bombs to destroy the Iraqi army in preparation for the ground campaign.

During the Gulf War, US forces experienced 147 battle deaths and lost 28 fixed wing aircraft. According to the Middle East Research and Information Project:

The US unofficially estimates the number of Iraqi soldiers killed as a direct consequence of the air and ground war in January and February 1991 to be 75,000 to 105,000. Senior US military officials have said that 60,000 to 80,000 Iraqis died in bunkers during the air assaults and an additional 15,000 to 25,000 were killed during the ground offensive.

I am sure that Senator Kelly was a fine Naval aviator who trained hard and was animated with patriotic spirit when he was a young pilot. However, as the above numbers reveal, it wasn’t an an evenly matched fight.

Military service in one’s youth is rightfully revered, but it should not shield an elected representative from criticism of his war policy thirty-four years later.

Throughout history it has been observed that old men holding political power have an unfortunate way of becoming detached from the suffering of the young men they send to their deaths.

In Kelly’s case, this age-old problem may have been accentuated by the fact that he killed an awful lot of ill-trained and poorly-equipped Iraqi conscripts without seeing many (if any) of his own guys killed.

It seems to me that Elon Musk’s remarks are spot on. Apart from more lucre for the beneficiaries of the Materiel Gravy Train, there is nothing to be gained by continuing the senseless war in Ukraine. The longer the inevitable negotiated settlement is delayed, the more people will needlessly die. Watch interview on X.

Elon Musk becomes deeply moved, and deadly serious, when Bret Baier asks him why he called Sen. Mark Kelly a “Traitor” for pushing to send more US aid and weapons to Ukraine.

Watch every second of his response.

“We should have empathy for the thousands of people dying everyday… pic.twitter.com/FP3rZSFDzL

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) March 27, 2025

Reprinted with permission from Courageous Discourse.

The post Elon Musk Is Right About Sen. Mark Kelly appeared first on LewRockwell.

ust this morning, I opened an email from an online merchant. Its peppy message meant to encourage me: “We just want you know today that you’re enough. You’ve got this!”

Funny, but I didn’t feel that way when my temper flared on a busy day last week. I didn’t notice this special empowerment in my darkened mood following an argument. I wasn’t feeling “enough” when I received a rejection letter. But don’t worry— I’ve got this!

We encounter these kinds of well-meaning platitudes all the time. Most of us don’t take it too seriously; but inside, we’ve internalized their lies. In fact, these snake oils for discouraged hearts create a dangerous illusion of self-sufficiency. We are therefore talented, smart, virtuous, deserving, and fabulous—is there anything we can’t do?

Grand illusions are eventually exposed, though. We can use an example at national level: If anyone held illusions of American strength, they now know the ugly truth. As DOGE shines its light on our government’s dark and confounding places, the shocking revelations grow daily. The masses now realize that behind our leaders’ performance art—all the flashing veneers and virtue signals—evil was working its wasting mischief.

Truth be told, many of us could use a similar audit of our interior lives. We, too, could use a searching light to expose our lies, crooked schemes and shocking corruptions. Behind our admirable facade and self-delusion, we might find evils and weakness of every kind—the marks of a crumbling infrastructure.

Even a committed Christian requires a regular accounting of the inner life. None of us are immune to the corrosive effects of sin—not even pastors, worship leaders, teachers, elders, choir members, organists, or little old church ladies. In Jeremiah 17:9 we are warned, The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

Elon can’t help us here, though. To find out what’s really going on behind our carefully-guarded personas—and for a proper accounting of our hearts—we need the searching light of the Holy Spirit. Only he can bring the receipts on our hidden reserves of pride or our fraudulent attempts at playing God. Only he can restore our accounts and put things right.

Unfortunately, most of us dread such exposure. We don’t want to dissect our embarrassing record of addictions, idolatries or grudges; we’d also rather normalize the everyday stuff like lust, anger, or anxiety. When it comes to our jobs or talents, we are perfectionists; but when it comes to sin, we’re contentedly “only human.”

In fact—if we’re being honest—we often don’t want God’s word to bring its promised light at all. Therefore, if God demands too much of our hearts, we spiritual bureaucrats protest or attempt in vain to lock them up. Exposing the deep state, by comparison, seems much more enjoyable.

So we plow ahead, hopeful that our natural gifts or past professions will carry the day. We don’t have time to get too picky about spiritual things; life is moving fast. A loving God must accept our good intentions; surely church attendance and conservative values count for something! Buoyed by such thinking, we can find ourselves lulled into dangerous self-sufficiency. We unwittingly sing Sinatra’s popular but foolish anthem: I Did It My Way.

Eventually, though, “my way” doesn’t work out very well. An embarrassing failure, some family drama, tragic news, or a dark night of the soul—one way or another, we will find that our talents and treasures are not enough. Our resolve and tough talk founder on hidden rocks. Our vaunted talents become our liabilities. Even a steely temperament sags under its own weight. When this world disappoints us—and it will—we may find ourselves exposed in our own kingdoms, emperors without clothes.

Maybe today you are feeling exposed this way; maybe you’ve reached the end of your resources. Your talents are wasted, your strengths are negligible, and your performance pitiful. You observe others doing naturally what, for you, seems a massive undertaking. You take stock of your life and hold it up against the shining record of another and feel discouraged—-or even demolished.

Maybe you’ve been a high-performer but remain unsatisfied. You’ve exceeded your civic obligations, outshone your competitors, and even found time to attend mass or church. Your social graces and material wealth have enlarged your reputation and secured some privileges. Despite all this, you have no peace.

Maybe you tried some spiritual exploit, but failed. You thought yourself a “victorious Christian” and found yourself unexpectedly defeated. You sinned conspicuously, and perhaps even confessed it and found forgiveness—but now you are immobilized and shamefully humbled.

If you’ve reached such a wilderness of shattering weakness and need, there is good news: although you are indeed not enough, God is. Your enviable resources can’t cover your deepest needs or corral unruly desires, but his can. Your good works cannot buy the righteousness God requires, but his did. Your personal treasury is bankrupt, but his is not; and he holds far more than gold.

Can you admit to such corruption and bankruptcy? Knowing we are helpless is one thing; confessing it to God and others is another. Those who confess their insufficiency and sinfulness are drawing near to God. Those who cast themselves on his mercies will find restoration. Those who trade their boasts for his abundance will find treasure. They are poor in spirit, and the kingdom of heaven will be theirs.

Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Matthew 5:3-6

“Every degree of apostasy from gospel truth brings in a proportionate degree of inclination unto wickedness into the hearts and minds of men.”
John Owen

This originally appeared on Restoring Truth.

The post Good News: You’re Not Enough appeared first on LewRockwell.

The reasons why conservatives fight so adamantly for smaller government have never been more obvious than they are today. Even before the DOGE audits, the galactic cost of federal debt spending was clearly crushing our economy. The interest payments alone are costing the American taxpayer around $1 trillion annually. If nothing changes for the better the national debt will hit $54 trillion by 2034.

Of course, this is unsustainable. The system will completely collapse well before another decade ends; under the weight of rising interest rates or under the weight of exponential inflation. We are already seeing the results of the spending bonanza through ongoing stagflation. Prices on most goods are 30% higher (or more) in the past 5 years. Home prices and rent costs are up at least 50% on average. Americans are being financially suffocated.

The US public wants a reckoning for this theft – And yes, it is theft. Our government, like an MC Escher drawing, is an endless maze of dead ends and black holes. It’s a vampiric organism that siphons money from taxpayer pockets, infinitely churning and embezzling and feeding until there is nothing left. It will not stop, until we make it stop.

Part of this parasite’s defense is to pretend like it doesn’t exist. We know it exists because we can see our blood being drained; we can see the results. But proving that it exists is another matter and it was nearly impossible because the only entity that has been allowed to audit the government is the Government Accountability Office (GAO). In other words, the government audits itself.

Most of our government apparatus is NOT elected. The vast majority of it is created from thin air through bureaucracy. Each new tentacle, once created, grows without regulation and forms new tentacles until there is no way to tell what connects to what and where all the money is going.

The original source of this bureaucracy is a cabal of ultra rich elites backing unaccountable NGOs. They helped to create the system over decades so that they could slither back and forth from government to NGOs to corporations without being noticed. The revolving door became standard and the same wealthy moguls and social engineers heading up think tanks and non-profits and international conglomerates were now able to cycle into various government agencies and change policy to benefit them.

Without the bureaucracy the power of the elites is greatly diminished. That is to say, bureaucratic agencies ARE the true power in government – Not presidents, not congressmen, not senators, and certainly not the American people. Political parties can change, presidents can change, the US can go from red to blue and back again, and the system remains mostly the same.

Until the Trump Administration and DOGE, no one has even tried to audit the government and figure out what the majority of these agencies are doing. The same goes for the Federal Reserve Bank, which facilitates fiat cash beyond the limits of taxpayer funds. They make deficit spending possible and allow the bureaucracy to grow without restriction. The Fed has never faced a full audit either, and good luck trying to get Congress to institute one.

The bottom line is this: The government has been deliberately engineered in such a way that nothing can ever be fixed or reformed. The existence of “the bureaucracy” as we know it today was never intended by the Founding Fathers and it should not be allowed to remain. It is the “Shadow Government”, or at least, it is the primary mechanism by which the Shadow Government rules over the US. Get rid of the bureaucracy and the elites lose everything.

This is why the global geopolitical reaction to DOGE has been so insane and violent; the parasites are seeking to protect themselves and keep their blood supply flowing.

Why does the average American citizen need an agency like USAID? We don’t need it – It serves no purpose. It functions only as an embezzlement scheme for bureaucrats and NGOs.  So, we just get rid of it, right? Except it’s not that easy…

For now it appears that the bureaucracy is using the judicial apparatus in a bid to prevent DOGE and Trump from making necessary cuts. Trump is being told that as President, he’s not allowed to fire anyone in the Federal Government. Think about how insane that sounds.

The jurisdictional overreach and clear political bias is astonishing, but it makes sense. The US President is not supposed to have any real power, he’s only meant to act as a figurehead to make us peasants feel like our votes matter. He’s not supposed to actually follow through on his campaign promises and effect legitimate reform according to the will of the people. That’s crazy talk…

The bureaucrats are so used to running the country and controlling the cash behind the scenes that they are utterly shell-shocked by the notion of being independently audited. They think they are above scrutiny or accountability.

Democrats in particular are absolutely enraged, taking to social media and ranting about how “democracy is under threat” because employees within these agencies are being asked to justify their jobs. The reaction to DOGE is so unhinged I don’t think the public is processing it yet.

Again, the Shadow Government (the bureaucracy) is the real government. When leftists claim audits and cuts are a “danger to democracy” what they mean to say is, THEIR POWER is being threatened. The majority of American voters elected Donald Trump and by extension his administrative team based on his campaign platform of smaller government and balanced budgets. Democrats argue that the will of the voters is anti-democratic.

So what is the solution to this blatant obstruction of voter choice and government accountability?

I believe the situation may end up calling for public intervention by conservative citizens. Leftist activists are being organized by NGOs to thwart DOGE, but where are the conservative activists to help DOGE? Maybe unnecessary agencies need to be shut down by public mandate regardless of what woke Obama appointed judges say?

A mass of conservatives surrounding an agency building would shut operations down by default and send a message, wouldn’t it? Leftists had no problem picketing outside the houses of Supreme Court Judges when they overturned Roe V Wade; conservatives could do the same thing with leftist judges blocking deportations of illegal migrants. If leftists want to use political intimidation by setting fire to Tesla dealerships, conservatives could organize groups to watch over these businesses.

This is not necessarily an effort to protect some electric cars from being vandalized. The point is to send a message that conservatives are not going to sit at home doing nothing while leftists run rampant doing whatever they please. The political left has had a near monopoly on public action for far too long.

I get it – A lot of these people are being paid to do what they’re doing and the rest of us have real jobs and real lives to keep us busy. But frankly, this should galvanize people more. If so many of these activist groups are astroturf then there needs to be a grassroots response to confront them. If they need to be paid and we don’t, then we hold a more legitimate and powerful position in the long run.

In terms of judicial obstruction I see very little recourse other than citizen intervention.

The other option is for the Trump Administration to ignore the judges and continue forward, but even this strategy would require very public mass support from Americans. To be clear, I understand that this creates a slippery slope for presidential power. However, did any of us in the Liberty Movement really believe that the government would shrink itself or that the elites would release their hold over the system because of an election?

Did anyone really think that a reckoning would happen with the endorsement of the courts? The courts have never been the true counterbalance to tyranny, the American people are the counterbalance.

Make no mistake, this is a life or death struggle playing out in front of our eyes. If we continue down the current path of unrestricted government our economy will implode and the establishment elites are positioned to take full advantage of such a crisis. There will be nothing left of America when they are finished; our nation will be a dried up husk.

Now is the time to remove them and their institutions from our society. If we don’t accomplish this task soon our children and their children will live in a world controlled by a faceless bureaucratic mafia immune to all accountability; driving each new generation into perpetual poverty and oppression.

Reprinted with permission from Alt-Market.us.

The post The American Public Will Have To Step in To Eliminate the Parasitic Bureaucracy appeared first on LewRockwell.

England and France, American puppet states for decades until the advent of Trump 2, are visibly at work disrupting Trump’s effort to reach a deal with Putin that ends the conflict in Ukraine.  The Russian Defense Ministry said that the second strike on the Sudzha pipeline infrastructure in Russia’s Kursk Region last Friday, which completed the destruction of the facility, was the work of Britain and France.

According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the targeting and navigation of the American HIMARS missiles (missiles Biden said he would not give to Zelensky but did) was provided by France. British specialists input the target coordinates and the launching command came from London.

What explains two American puppet states working against the United States government?  Is it another CIA operation against Trump? Is it the US military-security complex paying the British and French governments to keep the profitable (for the US military-security complex) conflict going?  Is it the Israeli-backed US Zionist neoconservatives continuing their efforts to diminish  Russia’s influence in world affairs?

Whatever is the answer, the Russian Foreign Ministry has no better idea than I do.  The spokeswoman, Zakharova, blames Zelensky for failing to observe the negotiated agreement that both sides cease attacking the other’s energy infrastructure.  Russia agreed to Trump’s proposal as a way of protecting nuclear power plants, the destruction which could be deadly for large numbers of civilians in Russia, Ukraine, and Europe.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov blamed the Ukrainian military for not following Zelensky’s orders.  It is a mystery how Zakharova and Peskov can continue to describe the situation as a Ukrainian issue when the two nuclear-armed (armed by Washington) NATO countries, Britain and France, are at work undermining the Trump-Putin peace negotiations.

If Trump and Putin were in the league with the great strategists in history, what would they do to bring this clown act to an end?  They would announce a military alliance. Putin can have Ukraine, the Baltics and as much of Europe as he wants.  Trump will take Canada, Greenland, and Panama.  No one on earth could do anything about this.

Putin does not want Ukraine, the Baltics, or Europe.  He only wants Russia to be left alone and to engage freely with the countries that comprise the world.  What Trump really wants, we don’t yet know.  But a Trump-Putin alliance would establish dominion over the rule of earth, Israel included.  Israel’s agenda of Greater Israel could easily be deep-sixed, Israel’s nuclear weapons destroyed, and justice given  to the Palestinians.  Israel would be reduced, instead of expanded, in boundary, and the Jews could use their talent for business to make the Middle East a prosperous area of the world.

President Trump seems to have the idea that the pursuit of mutual interests in business is far superior to the pursuit of war. Putin has shown himself to be the least combative of leaders of powerful countries. 

If only Trump and Putin could realize that a US-Russia military alliance would establish peace in the world, no more NATO, no more CIA overthrowing governments, no more propaganda about false news threats, we could enter a golden era of peace.

Of course, the military-security complex would assassinate both Trump and Putin.

Nevertheless, I believe both would risk it if only they could think of it. See this and this.

The post Trump and Putin Could Bring Peace to the World appeared first on LewRockwell.

The US launched 65 airstrikes in 24 hours in Yemen, and then Trump’s intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard tweeted, “President Trump IS the President of Peace. He is ending bloodshed across the world and will deliver lasting peace in the Middle East.”

These freaks have no connection with reality.

❖

I saw a video the other day of a father cradling the decapitated head of his son from an airstrike in Gaza, and I’m told I’m a terrorist supporter if I criticize the people who decapitated him.

❖

The word “terrorist” is a meaningless tool of imperial narrative control.

Want to bomb some people? Designate them as terrorists.

Want to silence protesters and dissidents? Say they’re supporting terrorists.

Want sweeping surveillance powers? Say you need them to fight terrorism.

❖

The list of people the Trump administration is working to deport for speech crimes against Israel is getting longer and longer, and includes a doctoral student whose sole offense was writing an op-ed critical of the Gaza holocaust.

Republicans spent years whining that government is too big and free speech is dying and everyone’s too weak and sensitive, only to turn around and applaud the government for stomping out free speech to protect their delicate little ears from hearing wrongthink about Israel.

❖

Two recent headlines:

“Israel admits firing at ambulances in Gaza,” from The Guardian,

and

“Israeli soldier tells CBS News he was ordered to use Palestinians as human shields in Gaza.”

The western press are only allowed to report on Israeli crimes when the Israelis admit to it themselves.

Half of the evidence of Israeli atrocities in Gaza comes from Palestinians filming their own genocide. The other half comes from Israelis telling the press what they’ve been up to.

❖

This you? https://t.co/iszrNEyTYm pic.twitter.com/OXPaVbOWB8

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) March 29, 2025

❖

The Democrats committed genocide. Now the Republicans are committing genocide. There you have it. Neither party is acceptable. Case closed. End of debate.

❖

Trump is as evil as Biden. Biden was as evil as Trump. If you can’t see this by looking at the raw data of the behavior of their administrations, it’s either because you’re looking at incomplete data or because you’re letting your political biases do your thinking for you.

Both presidents are guilty of extreme evils, and you can’t separate the evils of one from the evils of the other. Biden spent the latter part of his term incinerating Gaza, and then Trump began working to clear it of Palestinians. Trump managed to secure the Gaza ceasefire that Biden spent 15 months avoiding, but then he immediately began sabotaging that very ceasefire as soon as he took office. Biden has been waging a dangerous proxy war in Ukraine that Trump helped provoke in his first term, and now that he’s back in office Trump is tasked with winding that war down to focus on new wars.

The crimes of the Republican and Democratic parties are inseparably intertwined with each other. It’s not that they’re the same — there are some differences — it’s that they work in conjunction to advance the same evil agendas. Saying the Democrats are better than Republicans or vice versa is like saying the top teeth of the shark are nicer than the bottom teeth; they might look and function a bit differently, but they’re used toward the same deadly end.

❖

There are no anti-war Trump supporters. If you’re still supporting Trump after all his insane warmongering, you’re not anti-war.

❖

Trump supporters get so mad at me for listing facts about what a warmongering Israel cuck their president is. That big uncomfortable feeling you’re experiencing is called cognitive dissonance, fellas. It’s what being wrong feels like.

❖

Funny how the linguistic gymnastics of the mass media sometimes turns them into poets. They’ll go their whole dreary lives without making any art and then write a headline like “A blast disturbs the cool morning air. The smell of burnt flesh. A universe full of question marks.” https://t.co/Vf9mIJjSRV

— Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) March 26, 2025

❖

The single most bat shit insane conspiracy theory I’ve ever encountered on the internet is that all the death and destruction we’re seeing in the live-streamed genocide in Gaza is actually an extremely high-budget film studio hoax known as “Pallywood”. Flat earthers make more sense.

❖

If Israel doesn’t want westerners voicing their opinions about it then maybe it should stop making itself such a central character in the story of 21st century western imperial warmongering.

❖

Democrats pretended to support justice and oppose racism, then Biden exposed them all as frauds in Gaza. Republicans pretended to support free speech and oppose war, then Trump exposed them as frauds with his Israel policy. US politics is just empty noise draped over an empire.

That’s all it is. The pundits and politicians could all be speaking in baby talk gibberish and it wouldn’t matter. Presidential candidates could have their debates speaking Esperanto and it wouldn’t change anything. The only reason they bother using coherent English words at all is so people don’t get suspicious and start noticing that the politics of the United States are just empty noises fed to the public to let them feel like they’ve got some control while the tank treads of the empire roll onward.

It’s like this in all western “democracies”. The public is split into two equal factions who are then pitted against each other on issues that are guaranteed not to inconvenience the powerful in any way, and then the state just does what’s in the interests of the empire without regard for any of the noises being made in the political sphere. And the brainwashed masses just keep babbling on about their politics, completely unaffected by the fact that the things their government is doing run squarely counter to the values they purport to hold. There’s no real connection between the two.

__________________

My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Go here to find video versions of my articles. If you’d prefer to listen to audio of these articles, you can subscribe to them on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud or YouTube. Go here to buy paperback editions of my writings from month to month. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

The post The ‘President of Peace’ Just Bombed Yemen 65 Times in 24 Hours appeared first on LewRockwell.

Three years ago, a nationwide infant formula shortage shook America, and before long led to fights at grocery stores and stories like this flooding the media:

At the time, significant outrage was directed at the FDA since the shortage was due to pre-existing COVID-19 supply chain shortages exacerbated by a major recall by one of the leading formula producers (as at least two infants had recently died from contaminated formula, and the FDA had found the responsible bacteria at a major infant formula plant) which was then further exacerbated by a wave of panic buying that emptied many grocery stores.

This then led to many people pointing out it was ridiculous the FDA was willing to pull America’s formula supply over a relatively small production issue, but simultaneously was unwilling to do anything about the mRNA vaccines despite the fact the contamination in them and the deaths they were causing were orders of magnitude greater than anything which could possibly be attributed to the suspect infant formula lines.

As I watched this unfold, my thoughts were a bit different. Could there possibly be another way to feed your infants? Perhaps one that you could do at home that did not rely upon an unstable supply chain. I thus looked into how the homesteading and alternative health communities were addressing this dilemma and came across things like this:

I thus took the events of 2022 as a remarkable testament to just how effectively the formula industry had convinced mothers they needed to do anything besides breastfeed their children. At the same time however, I was hopeful these events would catalyze a public shift on this issue, so since then, I’ve gradually tried to put out the key points needed to understand what’s gone awry with infant formula and facilitate that change.

In turn, RFK Jr. recently announced an FDA initiative to make America’s infant formula healthy again (e.g., conducting a comprehensive review of its nutritional content, testing formula for heavy metals, and objectively assessing the health issues that arise from being formula fed). I believe that for “Operation Stork Speed” to succeed, it’s critical to understand the context of what’s happened with infant formula.

Note: in addition to heavy metals (and other harmful chemicals), infant formula has also repeatedly been found to be contaminated with aluminum, something which is quite problematic due to its adverse effects on the physiologic zeta potential (which the nervous system is very sensitive to disruptions of).

The History of Formula Feeding

While I strongly believe in the value of breastfeeding, throughout history and cultures, there are many references of mothers who could not sufficiently nourish their children with breastmilk who then sought out milk from other mothers or other supplemental sources of infant nutrition (which unfortunately were often not nutritionally adequate or contaminated with microorganisms).

Note: I believe that one of the primary causes of insufficient milk production from the mother was poor nutrition or malnutrition (something which was addressed in many early societies by having mothers eat specific diets).

This led to a variety of attempts to create a milk substitute that more accurately matched the safety and efficacy of human breastmilk (starting in 1865), a process which was revolutionized through the discovery of evaporated milk powder and its adaptation into infant formulas in the early 1900s. That was followed by various other attempts to produce more nutritionally adequate formulas.

As infant formulas improved in the 1920s, manufacturers began targeting physicians with their advertising. By 1929, the American Medical Association (AMA) established a committee to evaluate the safety and quality of formula compositions, leading many companies to seek the AMA’s “Seal of Acceptance,” bringing physicians closer to formula manufacturers. By the 1940s and 1950s, formula use became widely accepted as a safe alternative to breastmilk, and with the help of aggressive marketing and the inappropriate medicalization of childbirth, successfully displaced breastfeeding.

Note: the AMA’s seal of approval was created in 1905, and was designed to be a source of revenue to keep the struggling organization afloat (as it was given in return for advertising dollars rather than any assurance of safety—for instance the AMA widely promoted the benefits of smoking their sponsor’s cigarette brand). Sadly, once this funding allowed the AMA to begin establishing a foothold in the medical market, the organization then switched to blacklisting every competing therapy which would not sell out to the AMA (which is essentially why there are so many remarkable forgotten medical therapies exist from the early 1900s).

Many recognized this shift was harmful to both mothers and children. Hence, various groups (particularly the La Leche League, which was founded in 1956) mobilized the public to support breastfeeding mothers. In the 1970s, they finally reached the public (due to both scientific data emerging in support of breastfeeding and a growing societal dissatisfaction with the paternalistic and insensitive attitude medicine had to women). This shift began with middle-class mothers returning to natural breastfeeding, and gradually, governments eventually recognized the value of breastfeeding too (although it was not until 1984 that indecency laws against public breastfeeding began being updated). The decline in breastfeeding was, at last, reversed.

This chart combined a lot of different data sources.

One of the key events that catalyzed this shift away from formula was the Nestlé formula scandal (which began in 1973), which began after the public learned Nestlé was aggressively targeting poor women in undeveloped countries for infant formula sales. This was accomplish by paying hospitals to give free samples to mothers after delivery and telling mothers (frequently via sales reps impersonating nurses) that they would not be able to produce enough milk for their babies, which in turn let to the impoverished mothers frequently not only switching to infant formula but diluting it (as they could not afford standard doses). Millions of infants died as a result of these practices, and Nestlé eventually came under widespread public scrutiny (e.g., boycotts, celebrity protests, government investigations, and some of its predatory marketing practices being banned). The fact that Nestlé was able to convince millions of mothers to starve their babies to death again illustrates how predatory many of these marketing tactics were (particularly since some of those now outlawed practices still continue in the poorer nations).

Formula Marketing

During each pediatric “well-child” visit, in addition to pushing the currently scheduled vaccines on the child, the child will also be weighed and often told that, according to the growth chart, they are underweight, strongly encouraged to consume infant formula, and sent home with a free sample. One of the particularly concerning things for me about doctors pushing these products on children was that the ingredients in the most common brands were fairly unhealthy:

Additionally, because of how frequently the “underweight” diagnosis came up, I naturally became quite suspicious of it.

Note: somewhat analogously, patients will routinely be told that due to their blood pressure and cholesterol, they are at a high risk of having a heart attack in the next few years, so they must start a statin to prevent it. Given that almost everyone ended up being “high risk,” I was not surprised to learn that in 2016, Kaiser completed an extensive study which determined this calculator overestimated the rate of these events by 600%. Sadly, that has not deterred doctors from using this calculator (e.g., medical students are still tested on it for their board examinations).

I then came across a passage from “How to Raise a Healthy Child In Spite of Your Doctor,” (written in 1987 by one of the original medical dissidents—Robert S. Mendelsohn) which stated the growth charts were extremely inaccurate (e.g., that they did not take into account a wide range of genetic variabilities in weight or that breast fed babies weighed less than formula fed ones) and that:

What their doctor doesn’t tell them is that this [weighing] ritual has no medical significance whatsoever. They aren’t told that some formula manufacturer was probably the source of the growth chart the doctor is using, and that he gets them free. That leads to an obvious question: Why are the formula makers so eager to have your doctor check your baby’s weight? Answer: Because the weight gain of breastfed babies may not match the average weights shown on the formula maker’s chart. They hope that the pediatrician, instead of reassuring the mother that this is normal and nonthreatening, will tell her to stop breastfeeding and switch to their product, of which he has a handy reminder in his hand. Too often, that si exactly what he does, and the baby is subsequently denied the immunity and other benefits that breastfeeding provides.

Given Mendelsohn’s accuracy, integrity, and knowledge as an insider, I was quite intrigued about this and discovered that during his career, many dubious weight charts had circulated around, and that it was not until 1977 that the US government made a standardized one. Following this, in 2000, the CDC made a chart using the average weights of American children (who were often on formula), and in 2006, the WHO made a chart using the weights of children who had been breastfed. The CDC chart (which is what’s often used in the United States) in turn, was recognized to be more prone to classify children as being underweight.

Below age 24 months, the revised [CDC] weight-for-age curves are generally higher than in the 1977 charts. This will result in more frequently classifying infants as underweight. Similarly, this shift would be expected to result in lower comparative estimates of overweight when the revised charts are used.

As expected, there are important differences between the WHO and CDC charts that vary by age group, growth indicator, and specific Z-score curve. Differences are particularly important during infancy, which is likely due to differences in study design and characteristics of the sample, such as type of feeding. Overall, the CDC charts reflect a heavier, and somewhat shorter, sample than the WHO sample. This results in lower rates of undernutrition (except during the first 6 mo of life) and higher rates of overweight and obesity when based on the WHO standards. Healthy breast-fed infants track along the WHO standard’s weight-for-age mean Z-score while appearing to falter on the CDC chart from 2 mo onwards.

Thus, the scam was:

•Infant formula is composed of ingredients that will make children overweight and obese (the first ingredient is often corn syrup and then followed by seed oils).

•Children who have been made overweight from the formula are the “new normal,” and anyone who weighs less than them is diagnosed as being underweight and pushed to take the formula (e.g., see this 2010 blog post by a pediatrician about it).

In turn, many studies (and systematic reviews) have found formula feeding not only causes rapid weight gain but also makes children much more likely to be obese as adults.1,2,3,4,5,6

As such, formula’s role in the continually increasing childhood obesity rates (e.g., 19.7% in 2020) must be considered (but unfortunately we are instead “solving” it by putting children on Ozempic—a drug which has a great deal of issues).

Later, I got in touch with one of the (now retired) doctors Mendelsohn mentored, who shared a few other important things with me:

Mendelsohn told me that during his appointment as Medical Director of Project Head Start’s Medical Consultation Service in 1968, he was horrified by the discussions held privately in the White House with his medical colleagues. They were openly discussing how they could control the population of the poor by promoting infant formula, vaccinations, sadistic hospital birthing practices, deficient government schools, and neighborhood abortion clinics. This was just too much of an assault on his strong Jewish faith and his Hippocratic oath [and why he left the club to become a medical dissident].

The Similac and Enfamil drug reps used to leave infant boy and girl growth charts at my office front desk. The charts were in stacks joined with adhesive at the top, so that you could tear off a copy and place it in the child’s chart or give it to a parent. My recollection is that before the Nestle scandal, the company’s name and logo appeared on the growth chart, but I cannot be certain of this. All the growth charts currently available are distributed by the CDC and the WHO and bear only their logos. I have no doubt that the designers of the growth charts were captured by the formula manufacturers.

Along these same lines, the public educational systems were designed so that all children were expected to develop skills like potty training, speech acquisition, ability to read, etc. in a similarly regimented growth chart fashion.* Outliers are considered “abnormal” and their parents are subjected to fear, guilt, and intimidation, and the need for the involvement of more “caring professionals”.

Also while I was practicing, when an obstetric patient was discharged from the hospital, the drug companies gave each patient a “gift bag” which included coupons for discounts and a few bottles of their formula product [and what Nestlé had gotten in trouble for doing overseas]. My hospital had one or the other of Enfamil or Similac bottles which they administered to infants if the mother allowed their baby to go to the nursery, so that the mother could “rest”, or to prevent “neonatal hypoglycemia” or “neonatal jaundice” which were other scams applied to healthy newborns designed to undermine confidence in complete breastfeeding. I am certain that the formula was provided free to the hospital, because the manufacturers knew that hospital use endorsement would generate product loyalty. When a great lactation consultant joined the nursing staff, she strongly opposed these practices, and strongly encouraged rooming-in. She would visit each mother daily to supervise and help with nursing. The established nurses did not like the lactation consultant, because they preferred to stuff the newborns with formula and wrap them tightly in warm blankets so that they would sleep and remain quiet in the nursery.

Lastly, breastmilk is digested more quickly than formula. Breast suckling is hard physical work for the baby so the baby will stop feeding when satisfied. Therefore breastfed infants wake to feed more frequently. Formula fed babies more likely to over feed because the formula flows more easily. This goes along with the weight charts issue. A seasoned pediatrician can just look at a naked baby and immediately know if it is undernourished.

Fortunately, there is now growing awareness of the predatory tactics of the formula industry (which now has an annual growth rate of 10.15% and is a 90.91 billion annual market that costs the typical parent $1,500 to $2,500 a year). For example, to quote a recent investigation by the Lancet:

For decades, the commercial milk formula (CMF) industry has used [underhanded] marketing strategies, designed to prey on parents’ fears and concerns at a vulnerable time, to turn the feeding of young children into a multibillion-dollar business. The immense economic power accrued by CMF manufacturers is deployed politically to ensure the industry is under-regulated and services supporting breastfeeding are under-resourced.

[This] three-paper Series outlines how typical infant behaviours such as crying, fussiness, and poor night-time sleep are portrayed by the CMF industry as pathological and framed as reasons to introduce formula, when in fact these behaviours are common and developmentally appropriate. However, manufacturers claim their products can alleviate discomfort or improve night-time sleep, and also infer that formula can enhance brain development and improve intelligence—all of which are unsubstantiated. Infant feeding is further commodified by cross-promotion of infant, follow-on, toddler, and growing-up milks using the same branding and numbered progression, which aims to build brand loyalty and is a blatant attempt to circumvent legislation that prohibits advertising of infant formula.

Breastfeeding has proven health benefits…however, less than 50% of babies worldwide are breastfed according to WHO recommendations, resulting in economic losses of nearly US$350 billion each year. Meanwhile, the CMF industry generates revenues of about $55 billion annually, with about $3 billion spent on marketing activities every year.

The industry’s dubious marketing practices are compounded by lobbying, often covertly via trade associations and front groups, against strengthening breastfeeding protection laws and challenging food standard regulations. In 1981, the World Health Assembly adopted the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes, a set of standards to prevent inappropriate marketing of formula. It includes prohibition of advertising of CMF to the public or promotion within health-care systems; banning provision of free samples to mothers, health-care workers, and health facilities; no promotion of formula within health services; and no sponsorship of health professionals or scientific meetings by the CMF industry. However, despite repeated calls for governments to incorporate the Code’s recommendations into legislation, only 32 countries have legal measures that substantially align with the Code. A further 41 countries have legislation that moderately aligns with the Code and 50 have no legal measures at all. As a result, the Code is regularly flouted without penalty.

The prioritization of trade interests over health was brought to the forefront in 2018, when US officials threatened to enforce trade sanctions and withdraw military aid to Ecuador unless it dropped a proposed resolution at the World Health Assembly to protect and promote breastfeeding. Some CMF lobby groups have cautioned against improved parental leave. Duration of paid maternity leave is correlated with breastfeeding prevalence and duration, and absence of, or inadequate, paid leave forces many mothers to return to work soon after childbirth. Lack of safe spaces for breastfeeding or expressing milk in workplaces, or facilities to store breastmilk, mean that breastfeeding is not a viable option for many women.

All information that families receive on infant feeding must be accurate and independent of industry influence to ensure informed decision making. Marketing by the CMF industry is an interconnected, multifaceted, powerful system that knowingly exploits parents’ aspirations.

Note: the complete lack of evidence for many of the medical claims on infant formulas is discussed further here.

Seed Oils In Formula

Since seed oils are linked to obesity, inflammation, and metabolic dysfunction, many parents do not want to give them to their children. In turn, I am frequently contacted by frustrated patients after they discovered that almost every infant formula is full of seed oils. After some digging, I discovered this remarkable situation (formula manufacturers refusing to sell the product customers want) was due to the following:

•FDA regulations require infant formulas to have at least 2.7% of their calories (300mg per 100 Kcal) come from linoleic acid (LA, the problematic omega-6 fat in seed oils), and the FDA aggressively enforces this. Additionally, no maximum is given, so the amount of calories from LA in formula is often much higher (e.g., 7-9% for many common brands and sometimes reaches 17%).

•This regulation arose from the Infant Formula Act of 1980 (which was virtually unanimously passed by Congress in response to more than 100 infants becoming seriously ill from nutritionally inadequate soybean oil-based formulas). Unlike most (fairly vague laws which defer to Federal agencies) this act was well-known for being extremely specific in the nutritional requirements it stipulated for infant formula.

•Those nutritional requirements were directly copied from the 1976 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations that did not provide an explanation for why the LA requirements were put in (which is odd given that LA was not mentioned in the AAP’s 1967 recommendations).

•The Infant Formula Act had a provision [Section 412(a)(2)] that formula nutritional requirements could be revised at any time by the Secretary of the H.H.S. Remarkably, the only changes that were ever made were raising the minimum level of calcium per 100 kilocalories from 50 to 60 mg, phosphorus from 25 to 30mg and requiring 2.0-7.0 μg of selenium (which was instituted in 2016—27 years after the Institute of Medicine determined selenium was essential for children and formula manufacturers had already begun adding it in).

So, as you might guess, nutritional science no longer supports many of the requirements in the 1980 act, but virtually all of that science has been completely ignored.

In the case of linoleic acid, (the omega-6 fatty acid), at the time the act passed, the scientific consensus was that LA was essential for infant development. This was due to data like a pivotal 1963 study of 428 infants which found infants who had less than 0.1% of their calories come from LA developed skin symptoms (e.g., drying, shedding, irritation, or infections) due to a lack of oil in the skin (along with some degree of “reduced growth”) which disappeared in those who instead received 1% of their calories from LA.
Note: another pivotal 1972 study found almost identical results when infants who had to be fed through IVs were given fat-free nutrition (where the symptoms again were interpreted as a lack of LA rather than other essential fats).

However, beyond the “necessary” amount of LA being much lower than what was subsequently required (2.7%) or what ended up in formula (e.g., the current brands I checked ranged from 7-17.1%), it also became obsolete after it was discovered that the ratio between LA to ALA (omega-3) was much more important than the LA present (e.g., too high of a LA to ALA ratio created significant issues, as did a lack of DHA). For example:

•Those early studies did not include ALA in the experimental diets, and once a bit was present (e.g., 0.5%), the need for LA was halved.

•High dietary LA has repeatedly been found to interfere with the synthesis, accumulation, and incorporation of fatty acids such as DHA.1,2,3,4,5 Likewise, decreasing the ratio of LA present was found to significantly increase DHA in tissues, particularly the brain and retina.1,2
Note: DHA is essential for brain and eye development, but unfortunately like ARA, it is quite fragile and easily damaged during the manufacturing process (whereas in homemade formulas and human breastmilk they are not).

•One reason LA was considered “essential” is because the body converts it to arachidonic acid (ARA), which is critical for brain and nervous system development. However, in infants, the conversion is very poor (estimates range from 0.2-5%—this study for instance found infants only converted 1.2% of ingested LA to ARA), so infants require ARA rather than its LA precursor (e.g., 0.55% of the fats in human breastmilk are ARA).
Note: the levels of ARA and DHA are heavily dependent on the mother’s diet (e.g., one study found a Chinese community which consumed a traditional post-labor diet quite high in eggs, poultry and pork had significantly higher levels of DHA, ARA, and total fat content in their breastmilk, while when those mothers switched to consuming seed oils, harmful fats increased in their breastmilk). Likewise, the presence of choline (another critical nutrient for many developing tissues, including the brain) in breastmilk highly depends on the mother’s diet (e.g., eggs and liver being excellent dietary sources).

•High dietary LA does not support the growth of developing neurons, and in humans, it has been linked to atypical neurodevelopment and impaired motor and cognitive scores early in life.

•High dietary LA increases the brain’s vulnerability to inflammation.

In short, a strong case can be made that much of the original data arguing for the necessity of LA in formulas actually due to a lack of other essential fats, but rather than heed this, we opted to use an incredibly excessive amount of LA while simultaneously ignoring all of the science from the last 50 years that demonstrated the other fats needed to be focused on (and that, as a 2016 systematic review showed, we still have very poor data for these nutritional guidelines). Most remarkably, while other regulators (e.g., in China and Europe) have required fats like DHA to be included and lower LA to ALA ratios, the FDA has not (but will target companies who do not stuff their formulas with seed oils).

Note: while the government will often be extremely stubborn and refuse to correct a longstanding mistake (perfectly demonstrated by this example), I strongly suspect the unwillingness to fix the linoleic acid requirements was significantly influenced by lobbying (as LA is one of the cheapest ingredients available to the processed food industry). Likewise, many believe the medical literature is so hostile to home formula options because industry money was spent to eliminate any potential competition.

Read the Whole Article

The post Why Is What We Feed Infants So Unhealthy? appeared first on LewRockwell.

March 30 2025 By Kelvyn Alp, https://nzloyal.com/

The notion that viruses are the primary cause of many diseases has been a cornerstone of modern medicine for over a century.

However, a growing body of research suggests that this paradigm may be fundamentally flawed.

Dr. Mark Bailey’s seminal paper, “A Farewell to Virology,” (2022) and the work of Dr. Sam Bailey, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, and Dr. Tom Cowan, have collectively challenged the conventional wisdom on viruses and vaccines.

Their research posits that viruses do not exist as disease-causing entities, but rather as misidentified cellular components and other biological phenomena.

This idea is not new and builds on the pioneering work of former virologist Dr. Stefan Lanka and The Perth Group.

However, it has gained significant traction in recent years, largely because of the COVID-19 scamdemic.

The implications of this theory are profound, and they raise a crucial question: if viruses do not exist as claimed, what are we vaccinating against?

The vaccine schedules that govern our lives are based on the assumption that viruses are real and pose a significant threat to public health.

However, if this assumption is incorrect, then the justification for vaccines crumbles.

Are we simply creating a future dependent clientele for pharmaceutical companies?

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE HERE

The post If Viruses Do Not Exist As Claimed, What Are Vaccines For? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Gail Appel wrote:

Why am I laughing?  Perhaps because the world’s gone mad, myself included.

Not a day passes without  reported stabbings in Amsterdam, Paris, London, Berlin and Malmo . Or at least twice weekly in Dublin. Always with the suspect as an “ unamed migrant”. Never the country of origin. Which is code for an Islamist entity.

But this time, the knife wielder is from Ukraine. Which will provide a new problem for the politically suicidal EU, given the imperative of “ Saving Ukraine’s Democracy” from RUSSIA!

Of course,Europe is not collapsing under self imposed Islamization. Racism, xenophobia,Islamophobia and Extreme Rightwing White Nationalist Fascism,Putin apologists and Zionist empathizers are the greatest threat to EU Democracy ( aka native born white European citizens vs mass t class of whiteness is Ukraine! Maybe if the Ukrainian migrant stabbed a group of Islamists , they can pretend he’s really a Russian agent masquerading as Ukrainian to sow chaos! That works!

See here.

The post Suspect In Amsterdam Knife Rampage Is Ukrainian National, Police Confirm appeared first on LewRockwell.

Gail Appel wrote:

O  Canada!  Rogan’s a no go, China just executed 4 Canadian nationals for drug dealing and raised tariffs an additional 20%. That’s the trade war you don’t hear about and it’s been ongoing for quite awhile due to a rift. Perhaps that’s what Trump is using as leverage.

See here.

The post Joe Rogan Skips UFC 315 In Montreal, Citing Deep Concern Over Canadian Government appeared first on LewRockwell.

Gail Appel wrote:

 Terrific. Meanwhile, the EU “ Crisis Manager” is a Muslim immigrant.

See here.

The post EU’s Push For War Leaves Citizens To Brace For Fallout appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

CNN News

The post Trump says he ‘couldn’t care less’ if auto prices rise because of tariffs appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Smith. 

USA Today

The post Trump says U.S. will ‘get Greenland’ doesn’t rule out military force appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

John Leake

The post Hijinks with “Giza Underground City” appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thanks, John Frahm. 

Infowars

The post Trump Cuts Billion Dollar Grant to Eugenicist Bill Gates’s GAVI Vaccine Program appeared first on LewRockwell.