Lew Rockwell

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

It’s Game Over for the West

The post It's Game Over for the West appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

The First Armageddon: August 9th, 1945.

Seventy-seven years ago, August 8th 1945, Nagasaki was nuked by the most powerful nuclear bomb to incinerate and radiate a city, with Hiroshima being second and the only other city to be destroyed.   Some have called this a war crime, while others have disagreed, but all understand that the exigencies of war was their motivation.  And that as long as military troops or facilitates are the target, civilian casualties are regrettable but debatable product of war.  But what if the civilians and not the military was the primary target of the nuclear explosion?  That the military was secondary, the collateral damage in the parlance of war.  Then Nagasaki as a war crime would not be debated.  This is a tall case to make.  The prosecutors first requirements would be easy:  having the murder weapon and having the opportunity are cinches as there is ample evidence and confessing testimony.  The only hurdle, and a big one at that, is to establish motivation.  To establish that the civilians were the target.  To establish motivation even by a preponderance of evidence is hard to do, but what really seems to make this difficult is that Nagasaki was not listed as the primary target on August 8th!


Armageddon's original reference is to a location cited in the bible where a conclusive battle is fought.  By implication it also means a change in the world.  August 9th, 1945 meets these terms.  The most obvious change was the dropping of nuclear bombs on Nagasaki and before that Hiroshima, ushering in a nuclear age. Other readers may recall that with the surrender of Japan the world became bi-polar in the military sense and perhaps in the mental sense as well!  We will examine these changes of August 1945 and reveal new insights on those days.  There are several ways a new look at history can reveal important and exciting insights.  To know where to go it is good to know where you came from.  Insights can come from new information, from asking childlike questions or by putting known facts together for the first time.  These insights may range from "I suspected that," to "wow," to "nope."

Seeds of Hate

When the Japanese surrender document was signed aboard the battleship Missouri, the 1853 flag of Commodore Perry was there. The seeds of the war with Japan were sown in 1853 with the uninvited appearance of Commodore Perry's black fleet at Shimoda harbor.  The "Hermit Kingdom," as it was deservingly called, had banned virtually all intercourse with the rest of the world, save some Dutch ships allowed at Nagasaki.  Perry was ostensibly motivated by concern over shipwrecked sailors, but primarily by a desire to open mutually beneficial trade relations.  He was given broad latitude, including the option of using force, and was unencumbered by diplomats.  As is often the case, the first man credited in history with a discovery came in a large expedition financed by others, and it is only to be revealed in footnotes that other individuals preceded them.  The Lewis and Clark expedition of a few decades earlier asked Native Americans if they had ever seen a white man.  Every tribe had seen white trappers, except some natives near the continental divide, which had poor game (1).  Here, Perry was preceded by Ranald McDonald, a true adventurer, who put himself ashore disguised as a shipwreck survivor, knowing full well of the penalty of death.  McDonald taught English to a dozen samurai to facilitate communication with unwanted English-speaking travelers.  In Perry's negotiations all of the communications were translated to Dutch first, not the first-time negotiations were unnecessarily dragged out.  McDonald was released along with a dozen other less favored caged American sailors.  Perry's fleet of four ships message was as quiet as a murmur of wind, but to the future Emperor of Japan, it was as loud as an atomic bomb, 'Open up trade or else!'  These words drowned out other kind and endearing words, especially to the keen ears of Japanese potentates trained in two millennia of intrigue.  17,000 troops, many of them armored samurai, wearing masks, lined the shore.  Perry had steam powered ships with cannons; the Samurai had steel swords and, in many cases, small squares of iron or leather armor.  After negotiations, the representative of the ill Shogun, who in turn represented the reportedly powerless Emperor (defeat has a thousand fathers), succumbed to the humiliation of accepting priceless gifts, including a telegraph and a miniature train.  But those in power looked at the vile barbarian footprints on the ground.

The Emperor opened up trade to the world and embraced Western ways with startling speed, all the while burning over the imprudence and shame of 1853.  The scales of justice are not the same for the West and the East.  Perry may have used The Golden Rule for Japan, but to the Emperor, his son and his grandson, it was a humiliation and dishonor not to be forgotten (2).   Perry's visit resulted in other western countries seeking and getting visitation rights and eventually in the Meiji Restoration.  These improvements in commerce, transportation and manufacturing were inspired by the West while army and naval improvements were inspired by Germany and England respectively.  Following these improvements, the world was shocked by Czarist Russia's defeat by Japan in the war of 1900, 47 years after Perry.  Japan advanced more in 47 years than any other country had in a hundred or more.  The United States helped negotiate the forthcoming treaty, which gave present day Korea to Japan while leaving an independent Manchuria for future Japanese plans.

This woodblock exemplifies how many Japanese (left) saw themselves in relation to China and her Western advisers (right).

Desperate going to War, Desperate in War

To bolster Japan's diplomatic position, it signed a nonaggression pact with Stalin on April 13th, 1941, acknowledging Japanese control of Manchuco (Manchuria) and the Soviet empire's possession of Mongolia.  By the fall of 1941, the Japanese government felt strangled by Western embargoes of iron, scrap steel and especially oil, instituted in response to their invasion of China (3).  The embargo was considered an existential issue, the continuation of which would reduce Japan to a third-rate power.  Negotiations stalled over Roosevelt's demand for Japan to leave China and Southeast Asia (formally the French colonies of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos). When Japan agreed to this demand, a new demand for Japan to leave Manchuria followed.  To the Japanese it was the height of hypocrisy for white empires to moralize over Manchuria.  Roosevelt had the benefit of seeing Japan's diplomatic communications, whose encryption was broken.  My opinion is that Japan did not want a war with the United States in 1941, but felt it would become a third-rate power if it capitulated. However, war in western Europe did provide opportunity for Japan.  England kept sizable armies throughout the "Empire where the sun never set."  France and the Netherlands also had many colonies with armies which would have been useful when Germany invaded and conquered their homelands.  The United States had the Philippines.  Nowhere was Japan to find oil from this club.  The Dutch East Indies, present day Indonesia, had plenty of oil, but the small Dutch army took the lead of the United States and England and shut itself to Japan.

The strongest argument against Japan wanting war was the timing.  From July 1941 on, Japan drew upon it's precious raw material reserves while negotiations proceeded (3).  The oil storage facility at Pearl Harbor had about as much oil as all of Japan had in reserve.  The monsoon season was another problem.  In the Philippines, and Malaysia, the main targets, the monsoon season started in October, and November in the case of Indonesia.  The actual timing could not have been much worse.

The world in 1941 was populated by empires, and empires saw raw materials as vital to survival and growth.  Japan's leading strategist and sometimes tourist poker player, Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, feared this war and was aware of America's industrial might.  Reportedly he said after hearing an account of his Pearl Harbor attack,  "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."  There are those who think Roosevelt wanted Pearl Harbor attacked to get the United States into war with Japan's Axis ally Germany, and that Roosevelt even knew in advance of the attack.  We won't visit that lengthy controversy today.

An Ending and a Beginning     

In the beginning, God said, "Let there be light."  That may be how the war ended too, with the bright blinding light of an atomic explosion.  Not Hiroshima, but Nagasaki.  The beginning of the end may have started at the Potsdam conference.  The Potsdam Declaration of July, 1945 was intentionally vague, only promising the four main islands of Japan would remain as Japan, while allowing the Allies (not yet Russia) a completely free hand in the occupation and in removing "for all time of the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest."  Another restriction on Japan could be interpreted as an Allied reversal on the embargo, 'Japan shall be permitted to maintain such industries as will sustain her economy and permit the exaction of just reparations in kind, but not those which would enable her to rearm for war. To this end, access to, as distinguished from control of, raw materials shall be permitted.' The embargo led straight to Pearl Harbor and here, with caveats, free trade was given to Japan.  Another curious aspect was Truman's request that Stalin break the non-aggression treaty he had signed with Japan.  I have found no mention of Truman being embarrassed in asking Stalin to break a treaty, and no mention of Stalin in having qualms in breaking his word.  The Soviet declaration of war did admit that Japan had sought Russia out to mediate a peace treaty.  The declaration had a humanitarian slant to it: "…shorten the duration of the war, reduce the number of victims and facilitate the speedy restoration of universal peace." And, "this policy is the only means able to bring peace nearer, free the people from further sacrifice and suffering and give the Japanese people the possibility of avoiding the dangers and destruction suffered by Germany after her refusal to capitulate unconditionally." There was no injury to Russia mentioned, only humanitarian motivations for war.  Of the over half million Japanese troops who surrendered to Russia, only half returned to Japan, most in the 1950's.  This suggests casualties much greater than the atomic bombs, but this would not be the first time that Stalin's "humanitarian" efforts produced such results.  There is no eternal flame, and scarce mention of these casualties in our history books.

Why did Japan surrender?

Before we dig into this, it should be understood that Japan was ready to surrender weeks earlier.  This was known in decrypted communications.  The disagreement was in the unconditional surrender aspect.  A study by General MacArthur's Southwest Pacific Command explained, "Hanging of the Emperor to them would be comparable to the crucifixion of Christ to us.  All would fight like ants." (4) Of the top U.S. generals, only George Marshel stuck with unconditional surrender. So, what caused Japan to surrender?  Was it Stalin's entry into the war, or the bombing of Nagasaki?  The emperor's surrender statement supports each motivation.  It starts briefly with Russia, "After pondering deeply the general trends of the world and the actual conditions obtaining in Our Empire today…", but then dwells on the atomic bomb, "Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization."  (Based on Japan's inhuman treatment of prisoners of war, "human civilization" meant Japan.)  The Russian invasion army had a formidable 1.7 million men, although it had few transports for a mainland invasion.  These are the popular reasons historians point to for why Japan surrendered–the Russian invasion and the bomb–and they can point to both the surrender speech and the timing of surrender to support their cases, as well as the military effect of these actions.  Yet both explanations miss out on the best arguments, points and facts that to my knowledge have not been put together in print before.

In August 1945 the best hope Japan had was for as Stalin would say, give humanitarian aid to the United States.  Had the United States not developed the atomic bomb, a Soviet attack on the United States and England might have happened, but of course Stalin already knew about the existence of the bomb and its development from spies.  It is also interesting to speculate that the reason Japanese troops surrendered so quickly to Soviet troops, when they had previously fought fanatically against U.S. troops, was that Japan was still hoping for an agreement with Russia.  Japan surrendered because of the Soviet attack–not because it had a new foe, but because the hope of having a powerful ally was smashed.

Now to the Nagasaki case.  A common argument was that Japan was not impressed enough to surrender with Hiroshima, so why would Nagasaki be different?  Nagasaki was different.  "Thin Man," the name of the Hiroshima bomb, was fueled by uranium 235, a substance the Japanese scientists thought was very difficult to gather.  "Fat Man," the bomb at Nagasaki, was fueled by plutonium, a harder substance to produce and to trigger, but in much greater supply.  In other words, unlike Hiroshima, after Nagasaki, Japanese scientists knew it was possible for many more bombs to come.  In this argument it was Nagasaki alone that was convincing.  But we have one more fascinating, shocking, but still speculative argument as to why Nagasaki ended the war.

The Strange Targeting of Nagasaki

The first list of potential targets for nuclear annihilation was seventeen cities as reported by the New Yorker's Alex Wellerstein on August 7th, 2015.  The attributes needed for this grisly selection were to be of military significance, geographically conducive to maximum damage, that is, circular and preferably bowl shaped for maximum effect, not previously bombed/damaged, and presumably not containing prisoners of war.  Nagasaki made the list of seventeen but not the cut to five, which included only Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokira and Niigata.  Kyoto was removed because Secretary of War Henry Stimson visited the city several times and perhaps had a honeymoon there and considered the city culturally important.  (Stimson also had a hand in the internment of Japanese Americans).  But professor Alex Wellerstein, as quoted by the BBC, was not convinced, since other cities also had valuable assets.  "That is why it seems that Stimson was motivated by something more personal, and these other excuses were just rationalizations."  The same day that Kyoto was removed, Nagasaki was penned in, as shown in the document below.  Stimson wrote in his diary on July 24th, 1945, "he (Truman) was particularly emphatic in agreeing with my suggestion that if elimination was not done, the bitterness which would be caused by such a wanton act might make it impossible during the long post-war period to reconcile the Japanese to us in that area rather than to the Russians."

Hiroshima was nuked, Kyoto removed, and Yokohama bombed conventionally and removed from the list.  This left Kokura, Niigata and now Nagasaki.  Why add Nagasaki?  As a military target it was scheduled to be one of the early cities to be captured by invasion.  The shipyard could not be seen as a threat since large Japanese vessels had the life spans of fruit flies.  The city had been bombed no less than four times.  The geography was miserable, a sprawling city divided by mountains. Furthermore, there were known to be many prisoners of war in the city – 400, it turned out.  We are getting close.  Let us shift to what Japan's leaders may be thinking.  The life and throne of the emperor is vital. The only thing close to that is the essence of Japan, the culture, who they are.  If America wanted to remake Japan, the most likely attempt in the eyes of Japans leadership would be to make it in your own image. About 14 months earlier on June 6th 1944 on D-Day President Roosevelt said: Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.  One of the most, if not the most, cultural city that represents Japanese heritage is Kyoto.  The city with by far the most Christians in it was the city designated in the past for foreign ships to visit.  Nagasaki.  To make Japan Christian you start at Nagasaki, not destroy it.  I think Nagasaki was added to the list, not to the bottom of the list, but as much a priority as either of the two remaining cities, for the same reason Kyoto was removed:  to signal that America would not remake Japan.  To end the war.  As it turned out, Stinson failed to get Nagasaki as the primary target for the second atomic bomb.  Kokura was the intended target, Nagasaki was used when "haze and ground cover" obscured Kokura.  In any case, Stinson's concerns were addressed, and perhaps so were the Emperors.

We can stop here… but let's have a little more fun.  The United States weather plane, Enola Gay sent in the morning to scout Kokura reported clear skies.  Bockscar, the plane carrying the bomb, reported ground haze and smoke over Kokura.  This could have been steam deliberately emitted from factories or changing weather.  The smoke could have also been from the previously scheduled firebombing of Yawata (5).  Two other planes accompanied Box Car, Great Artiste carrying scientific instruments and Big Stink.  The photography plane, Big Stink, which could have settled whether Kokura could be seen, got lost and never showed up.


Final Thought

Albert Einstein was once asked what weapons would be used in a World War III.  He said, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."  Perhaps, but the popular refrain that there are enough nukes to blow up the world one hundred or a thousand times over does not add up.  Using round numbers, there are approximately 3000 non-tactical nuclear weapons in the U.S. arsenal, each with enough destructive power to destroy approximately 100 square miles each. This adds up to 300,000 square miles of destruction (7).  Alaska contains 586,412 square miles.  Naturally, in war these nukes would skip Alaska and be enough to destroy every large city in the world, but we are far away from being able to destroy the world 100 times over, or even once.  The peculiar reaction I get when explaining this to people is anger, disappointment and fear.  You would think this was good news.  I did mention our bi-polar world in the beginning.

  1. (Lewis and Clark.)
  2. Japan's Imperial Conspiracy, by Begamini David pp5. (Motivations.)
  3. (The oil embargo).
  4. (On unconditional surrender.)
  5. (Bomber details.)
  6. National Archives and Records Administration. Through (5). (Picture.)
  7. (United States Nuclear Weapons)

The post The First Armageddon: August 9th, 1945. appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

Book Review: ‘The Courage To Face Covid-19’

Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex
Co-Authors: John Leake & Peter A McCullough MD.MPH

John Leake is a best-selling an "experienced non-fiction, true crime author". Having just read what must be described as an extraordinary 'telling' of the COVID-19 saga, this book is the narration of true crime on a scale that could top the list in the history of 'man's inhumanity to man'.

The book chronicles the unique role of national governments across the world and their health agencies, led by the USA and WHO, which followed an agenda that led to completely avoidable fatalities numbering several million. The question is why?

The usual culprits are money and power. But to ascribe cause to these two is woefully insufficient. The sheer magnitude of the 'dark agenda' –  coordinated and played out by governments, health agencies, the medical establishment (hospitals, doctors and chemists) and the massive and deliberate disinformation by the legacy media – defies such easy explanations. As one journalist on Leake's team put it, "but this is evil".

Dr. Peter McCullough says it will take a legion of investigators and investigative journalists to "untangle and delineate what would ultimately be revealed as a massive crime against humanity".

This book is in part that investigation, zeroing in on why treatment protocols (especially early treatment) were side-lined, leading to disastrous consequences. The book is an impressive, accurate and lucid telling of this crime on a global scale, with its lens on the USA.

John Leake could not have wished for a more authoritative voice than Peter McCullough, his co-author. McCullough, a practising board certified internist and cardiologist, is the most published author in history in the field of cardio-renal medicine.

By 2020, he had published over 60 peer reviewed academic medical papers. In addition to his medical doctorate, McCullough has been awarded eight medical certifications from various societies. He is now a published leading expert in treatment protocols, particularly early treatment for COVID-19.

The 'McCullough Protocol', which has evolved over 22 months, has helped treat millions of patients worldwide, saving countless numbers of people from hospitalisation and death. Because 'the battle' is being fought on the grounds of medical authority, only medical doctors of the unique calibre and expertise of someone like Dr. Peter McCullough are in a position to take up the cudgels.

McCullough also has the vital qualities of integrity and courage that allow him to take on this vastly unequal fight against the bio-pharmaceutical complex that includes the US government and its health agencies (the FDA, CDC, NIAID) and the WHO.

The book sets out the timeline of the 'pandemic'. The WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11 March 2020, using a highly inaccurate and faulty RT-PCR at high CTs (cycle thresholds) above 40. Those who tested positive and had no symptoms were labelled 'asymptomatic', a new category of COVID patients that ratcheted-up the numbers required for declaring a pandemic.

Dr Fauci (assuming the mantle of the US's chief public health officer) declared on 16 March 2020 that his institute the NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the US National Institutes of Health – NIH), had developed a promising vaccine to combat SARS-COV-2 at a substantial investment. This was promoted as humanity's only hope.

Fauci forgot to mention that the NIH co-owned the patent. This was 'warp speed' indeed.

Interestingly, during a simulation at Event 201 on 28 October 2019, it was stated that CEPI (the Coalition of Epidemic Preparedness Innovation) was already working on a corona virus vaccine, the first step of its business plan (BP) published in November 2016. CEPI was launched in January 2017 in Davos by the Gates Foundation, the WEF, the governments of Norway, Japan, and India and the Wellcome Trust.

The book notes that treating COVID-19 with existing drugs was not part of the BP. That is why there was no interest in re-purposed drugs like hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), which had been approved since 1955 by the FDA as a malaria prophylaxis. Billions of doses had been administered over the decades. The drug is safe, cheap and easy to manufacture.

Research teams in China were reporting favourable results for treating COVID-19. McCullough says, "the only thing in the literature is HCQ. We should take the Indian medical Council's (ICMR) recommendation to use it".

The other re-purposed drug that has been successful in treating COVID-19 as a prophylactic and at every stage of the disease is the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin. It would be hard to overstate the significance of the effectiveness of ivermectin: it is an inhibitor of SARS-COV-2 in vitro. A single treatment effected "approximately 5000-fold reduction in virus at 48 h in cell cull culture" (Study by Monash University of Australia).

Ivermectin is FDA approved and like HCQ is widely available, off-patent and inexpensive. It is on the WHO model list of essential medicines. Since its discovery in 1989, ivermectin has cured two great scourges (river blindness and elephantiasis) and has been widely prescribed.  Like HCQ, ivermectin is hugely effective at mitigating COVID-19 disease and death.

Both drugs are derived from natural sources. HCQ (natural ancestor, quinine) is derived from the cinchona bark (discovered by the Quechua of Peru) and ivermectin is a bioactive compound derived from a soil bacterium (Streptomyces avermectinius). Its discoverer Satoshi Omura and his colleague at the Merck Institute Dr William Campbell won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for ivermectin in 2015.

In 2017, the report from The Journal of Antibiotics reported: "enigmatic multifaceted 'wonder drug' continues to surprise and exceed expectations". The journal presented ivermectin's therapeutic properties against an array of pathogens, including viruses.

Both HCQ and ivermectin should be of star value for India because they fit in so well with her 5,000 year history of medicinal plant science in Ayurvedic healing traditions. Both were used to great effect for treating COVID-19, especially in UP (Uttar Pradesh). Unfortunately, despite the data, the Indian government and WHO withdrew support for it.

The authors note that the impressive evidence that both drugs were effective treatments for the virus was stonewalled by Fauci and the CDC and met with a wall of silence by the legacy media. Inexplicably, remdesivir was the only drug authorised and made available in US public hospitals; a drug without a safety profile and which could be fatally toxic, leading to kidney failure.

Furthermore, compared to the price at 'pennies' of HCQ and ivermectin, remdesivir was priced at over $3,000 per treatment, but took a mere $10 to produce! The message from Gates was: "there is no treatment apart from remdesivir. Stay home — wait for the vaccine".

Readers are informed that health agencies told the medical profession that nothing could be done to treat COVID-19, backed by the press that emblazoned this therapeutic nihilism. A panicked public was denied any form of treatment – wait till your lips are blue and then go to the hospital. Patients were isolated and alone, no relatives were allowed to visit.

When they reached the point where they could not breathe, they were put on mechanical ventilators, a death knell: 80% died. Ivermectin was resolutely and tyrannically denied – even when there was no hope that the patient would survive and against the pleading of husbands, wives, parents.

Incredibly, even court orders were flouted. In the few instances where hospital doctors were explicitly ordered to stand aside and let a protocol of ivermectin be administered, such patients recovered and fast. The others? They died.

In Texas alone, 45,000 died. Peter McCullough estimates around 70% of COVID-19 fatalities could have been prevented. By Christmas 2021, that figure was 610,000 preventable deaths. He said, "there is so much focus on the vaccine, where is the focus on people sick right now".

The proven solutions to the virus in HCQ, ivermectin and other drugs, (methylprednisolone, heparin, azithromycin, zinc and orthomolecular medicine, specifically high dose vitamin C), proved that this was a most treatable virus,  or as Prof Didier Raoult pronounced – game over!

Despite this, experimental (unapproved and untested) vaccines were rolled out at warp speed under Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA). The explicit legal, statutory requirement is that there must be no adequate, approved and available alternatives.

Herein lies the authors' tale of horror and fraud, with profits of trillions of dollars for vaccine manufacturers, (who are also indemnified from causing harm), through an official policy of a needle in every arm.

At the same time, various monetary incentives came into play to boost COVID patient numbers via a hastily drafted CARES Act (Corona Virus Aid, Relief and Economic Security). Medicare has determined a COVID-19 admission to hospital will entitle the establishment a payment of $13,000. If that patient goes on a ventilator, the payment is threefold or $ 39,000!

It is also acceptable to report COVID-19 on a death certificate as "probable" or "presumed" where a definite diagnosis cannot be made. From November 2020, hospitals also got an additional 20% add-on payment when a prescribed government drug was used – remdesivir.

The book also sets out a conflict of interest so colossal that it defies credulity.

The Gates and Fauci partnership, (with the Wellcome Trust) controls around 57% of global bio-medical research funding. The Gates foundation is invested in virtually every vaccine and also controls much of the mass media. Excluding contractual payments to the news media, in 2020, the Gates Foundation grants were of the order of $250 million. The full scope of its funding is unknown. This explains the slander, the massive disinformation and fake news.

An intrepid battalion of medical warriors like Dr. Peter McCullough has refused to kowtow to the raging medical tyranny.  The pandemic has demonstrated that the light of consciousness has dimmed globally. Yet "we live in order to become conscious" (CG Jung).

Doctors and medical scientists of immeasurable stature were junked, their careers 'cancelled' for safeguarding our medical freedom. If we should lose our medical freedom, we lose every freedom. These scientists have prevailed, however, and have thrown a lifeline to millions through early treatment protocols. This book is about them.

In finishing, it is worth noting that we now have evidence – and it is growing – that EUA vaccines, which have been mandated by governments, the WHO and private industry, are associated with increased risk of disease and death from COVID-19. By July 2021, the CDC VAERS system recorded 6,207 deaths (quoted by Leake).

This originally appeared on Off Guardian.

The post Book Review: 'The Courage To Face Covid-19' appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

Pelosi’s Taiwan Trip Exposes Foolishness of Interventionism

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's "surprise" trip to Taiwan last week should be "Exhibit A" as to why interventionism is dangerous, deadly, and dumb. Though she claimed her visit won some sort of victory for democracy over autocracy, the stopover achieved nothing of the sort. It was a pointless gesture that brought us closer to military conflict with zero benefits.

As Col. Doug Macgregor said of Pelosi's trip on a recent episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight, "statesmanship involves advancing American interests at the least cost to the American people. None of that is in play here. … Posturing is not statesmanship."

Pelosi's trip was no outlier. Such counterproductive posturing is much celebrated by both parties in Washington. Neoconservative Senators Bob Menendez and Lindsey Graham were thrilled with Pelosi's stop in Taipei and used it as a springboard to push for new legislation that would essentially declare war on China by declaring Taiwan a "major non-NATO ally."

The "one China" policy that, while perhaps not perfect, has kept the peace for more than 40 years is to be scrapped and replaced with one sure to provoke a war. Who benefits?

Foolishly taking the US to the brink of war with Russia over Ukraine is evidently not enough for Washington's bipartisan warmongering class. Risking a nuclear war on two fronts, with both Russia and China, is apparently the only way for Washington to show the rest of the world it's serious.

The Washington Post's neoconservative columnist Josh Rogin accurately captures the mindset in Washington DC with a recent article titled, "The skeptics are wrong: The US can confront both China and Russia."

For Washington's foreign policy "experts," those of us who don't believe a war with both Russia and China is a great idea are written off as "skeptics." Count me as one of the skeptics!

During the Cold War there were times of heightened tension, but even in the darkest days the idea that nuclear war with China and the Soviet Union could be a solution was held only by only a few madmen. Now, with the ideological struggles of the Cold War a decades-old memory, such an argument makes even less sense. Yet this is what Washington is selling.

The US fighting a proxy war with Russia through Ukraine and Nancy Pelosi provoking China nearly to the point of war over Taiwan is meant to show the world how tough we are. In reality, it demonstrates the opposite. The drunken man in a bar challenging everyone to a fight is not tough. He's foolish. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose from his display of bravado.

That is interventionism at its core: a foolish policy that provokes nothing but anger overseas, benefits no one in the US except the special interests, and leaves the rest of us much poorer and worse off.

There may be plenty to criticize about China's government and policies. They are far from perfect, particularly in protection of civil liberties. But have we already forgotten that our own government shut down the country for two years over a virus, and then forced a huge number of Americans to take an experimental shot that is proving to be as worthless as it is dangerous? Let's look at the log in our own eye before we start lobbing missiles overseas.

The post Pelosi's Taiwan Trip Exposes Foolishness of Interventionism appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

Gender Identity, First Do No Harm

Political ideology can often cloud judgement and impair critical thinking. I am not suggesting that you should have no convictions or even that relying on political ideology is necessarily bad. Still, it should be recognized that ideology is in a sense an algorithm. It is a prism to view the world through and often in a sense putting it on 'autopilot'. While it is alright to operate with a dominant template it is important to disengage from that template a from time to time and look at things independently with an unbiased perspective.

Why am I lecturing on over reliance on ideology?

When it comes to issues of sexuality and gender identity there is very little nuanced discussion or debate and there has been a conflation of political identity and clinical reality. The political alliance of the gay and lesbian community with transgender individuals has clouded judgement regarding the serious ethical issues regarding sex change operations and hormone replacement therapy.

This conflation may be partly the residual effect left over from when homosexuality was once regarded as a mental health disorder by healthcare professionals. It may surprise people that those that have gender identity issues and have had sex change surgery are still often attracted to the opposite sex to their birth sex. The reality is that sexual orientation or preference is dealing with behavioral preference and is not necessarily connected with gender dysphoria.

Gender identity or dysphoria issues are literally a delusion and a denial of one's biology. It should be noted that delusion is not meant in a derogatory sense here as it is often in normal conversation when you tell someone they are delusional about a belief that is 'out there'. Delusion here is meant in a literal sense. The belief runs contrary to physical reality.

A 2014 CDC study on sexuality reported that 1.6% of the population is gay and lesbian, .7% bisexual, and around .1% didn't know. As a whole LGBT is 2.4% of the U.S. population. Less than .1% of the population is transgendered. (Ward, Dahlhamer, Galinsky, & Joestl, 2014). If these numbers, especially the transgender number have changed, then that would be the direct result of mass media and academic influences.

Read the Whole Article

The post Gender Identity, First Do No Harm appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

We Can’t Let Them Do This

The post We Can't Let Them Do This appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

Central Planning Fails Just as Much When Conservatives Are the Planners

It's a popular narrative on the Left at the moment to say that members of the Right have an unhealthy disdain for "experts." Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell is a notable critic on the matter, but the view here is that her criticism misses the mark. Reasonable members of the Right don't loathe experts as much as they dislike central control.

Reducing all of this to the absurd, let's imagine for fun that the smartest individual in the United States is none other than our President, Joe Biden. In a nation populated by geniuses, Biden sitting at the top in terms of intelligence wouldn't alter a simple truth frequently ignored by the expert reverent: there's arguably not a fraction yet conceived that could properly convey how small Biden's knowledge would be relative to the collective knowledge of the American people.

All of which hopefully explains why markets always and everywhere beat central planning. It's not that there aren't smart and realistically brilliant people in high positions of government. There certainly are. But the combined knowledge of the revolting masses is much greater.

That's why readers reasonably have a fool-proof way of detecting future trouble. It's when those in power promise a crisis if they're not allowed to do something in response. "Do something" is another way of saying "central planning by experts" will substitute for freedom. When government intervenes, limited knowledge pushes aside abundant knowledge, with predictable results. The "crisis" is always and everywhere born of the taking of freedom. It's the intervention.

No doubt there are conservatives somewhere in the world reading what's just been written, and agreeing. After all, Friedrich Hayek's Road to Serfdom was nothing if not a call for freedom. Markets are wise because they're a consequence of infinite decisions made every millisecond by thousands, millions, and billions of people. The problem is that conservatives are increasingly the planners.

Read the Whole Article

The post Central Planning Fails Just as Much When Conservatives Are the Planners appeared first on LewRockwell.

Lew Rockwell
9 Aug 2022 | 6:01 am

Government Database Reveals 10,000% Increase in Cancer Reports Due to Covid Vaccines

Brian Shilhavy, a researcher, compared VARES reports of cancer following COVID vaccine injections over the previous 20 months with the same query of all vaccines licensed by the FDA over the preceding 30 years. The results from the government database reveals a 10,000% increase in cancer reports due to COVID vaccines.

A study of the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) found a 10,661.4% spike in cancer diagnoses as a consequence of experimental COVID-19 gene-base vaccinations compared to all FDA-approved vaccines over the past 30 years.

The editor of Health Impact News, Brian Shilhavy, recounted his steps in the search, including links to documentation of his numerous results.

Having first queried the cases of "the most common cancers [that] had been reported following COVID-19 vaccines," he found "837 cases of cancer, including 88 deaths, 66 permanent disabilities, and 104 life threatening events (Source)."

He stressed that such figures were not exhaustive, and that the VAERS database could not handle a more comprehensive search of "ALL cancers listed in VAERS" underneath this group of COVID immunisations.

"Using the exact same search terms for cancer," he wrote, "I then searched ALL FDA-approved vaccines for the previous 30 years and found only 140 cases of cancer reported (Source)."

"That result is for 360 months (30 years), whereas the 837 cases following the experimental COVID-19 vaccines were reported in just 20 months, since the roll out of the COVID-19 shots beginning in December of 2020," Shilhavy wrote.

"That is an increase of 10,661.4%!" he concluded.

Shilhavy, whose firm is based in Texas, also noted how many of the cases of cancer in the database were children and adolescents, ranging in age from 12 to numerous young adults in their 20s.

Read the Whole Article

The post Government Database Reveals 10,000% Increase in Cancer Reports Due to Covid Vaccines appeared first on LewRockwell.

Text to Speech by: ResponsiveVoice-NonCommercial licensed under 95x15
stránka nevyužívá cookies, ne špionáž, ne sledování
abychom mohli používat web, zkontrolujeme:
země: CZ · město: Hluboka nad Vltavou · ip:
zařízení: computer · prohlížeč: CCBot 2 · platforma:
pult: 1 · online:
created and powered by: - profesionální responzivní webové stránky
 čekejte prosím načítání dat...