The Market Ticker - Cancelled ®
What 'They' Don't Want Published - Category [Editorial]
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in any firm or security discussed here, and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. Pitch emails missing the above will be silently deleted. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2024-03-09 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 452 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Ok, having had a day to think about the rather-visceral reaction I had to it my view..... hasn't really changed much.

It was something rather appropriate as a campaign speech, which would be fine on the campaign trail.  But it was wholly-inappropriate in a joint session of Congress as it was full of attacks that would be ruled out-of-order were they to be committed by one side of the aisle against the other in an ordinary session.

I'm sure plenty of Democrats loved it anyway but there's a very serious problem with doing this: It is an election year, doing this shuts down any possibility of cooperation with the minority party for the rest of the year and more-importantly it is a bet that you will not only win you will hold the Senate and flip the House.

That's foolish folks.  It might happen, but banking on it is idiotic and that's exactly what happened.

It is doubly stupid in this case because in this cycle, unlike the last one, the math favors the Republicans in November for the Senate and the margin the Democrats hold now is exceedingly thin.  Even if Biden wins over Trump there is a very high probability he loses the Senate, and if that happens there may be no cooperation with him at all within Congress.

Never mind the outright lies (such as that the mRNA vaccines are now the cure for cancer) and several economic claims that are just plain false.  Everyone lies on the campaign trail, especially when you're an incumbent and stretching the truth if not lying outright is just part of the game.  That much I expected, but the outright attacks on the GOP were IMHO extraordinarily unwise.

Never mind the much-expressed fear that if Trump does win he will take all of Biden's precedents in weaponization of parts of the government and use them against Democrats.  He very well might, and whether its wise to poke that sort of potential response is something I doubt anyone gave much thought to.

The repeated pokes of "this is how it is, damn you, and you had better agree" on various issues, most-notably climate and immigration, were especially galling.  As I've pointed out repeatedly the President has near-plenary authority to shut the border down to any particular class of immigrants -- or even all of them.  He not only doesn't need any new authority its very clear he has it already and has simply refused to use because he wants something very different, including a permanent level of immigration in the millions, that is actually protected under law and thus very hard to get rid of.  This is especially galling given the now-known problem with not only Laken's murderer but his brother who, it is alleged, has Venezuelan gang ties and yet was released into the US anyway.

Never mind Speaker Johnson who committed a very serious error in passing that "minibus" bill before the speech.  While nobody wanted to play brinksmanship with a potential shutdown I'll bet that would not have passed had he waited and by passing it first given that he knew the SOTU speech was going to come Thursday Speaker Johnson gave Biden a green light to do this, which was politically stupid -- and that bill includes provisions that are likely intolerable to a majority of Americans including the new car "kill switch" requirement.

I'm sure the 25% "most left" part of the US thought this was a "great speech."

But it was wildly intemperate, even angry to the point of near threats of violence via various government agencies to anyone who disagreed, and certainly did a hell of a lot of damage -- perhaps irreparable damage -- to any degree of comity across the aisle which is now inseparable from Biden and/or Harris being in the Oval Office.

Maybe that works out for Biden and in November the Democrats win literally everything -- they flip the House, they keep the Senate and keep the White House.

Maybe.

But if not this speech may prove to be the political equivalent of swallowing a grenade after pulling the pin.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2023-03-28 09:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 464 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Friedman famously claimed that world "free trade", which he fully knew would begin with Chinese and Mexicans earning 1/20th or less of their American counterparts, would almost-immediately begin to normalize wages over there.  That is, having "tasted freedom" the workers would essentially force companies to pay competitive world wages and their standard of living would wildly improve.  This would turn them into consumers of the very same products they produced and thus greatly expand the economy as a whole.  While he acknowledged this distribution would not be even the premise was that the great improvement generally would outweigh any modest declines in established markets.

He was wrong.  NAFTA was passed and what Ross Perot said would be the case turned out to be true; wages in Mexico did not normalize with America.  We offshored labor to Bangladesh and Vietnam for textiles and nearly everything to China and wages did not normalize with the western world over there.

Likewise in many American cities in the 50s and 60s we built "projects" for low-income housing.  Cabrini Green was one of the most-notorious of course but hardly the only one.  Some of these were constructed to house displaced people during the Eisenhower Expressway system construction through major cities, but hardly all had that as their excuse.  These places turned into hotbeds of crime, drugs and squalor, and we were told it was the concentration that was the problem; dispersing said people with Section 8 vouchers all over the urban and suburban landscape would cause them to experience good culture instead of bad and thus adopt the good elements, at least in part.

That's not what happened.  Instead the "bad culture" expanded wildly into the urban and suburban school districts, destroying the quality of education for everyone.  The drugs, thuggery and similar nonsense expanded there too, along with the criminal element that inevitably comes with all of it.

Joe Biden nominated Kato Crews for a federal district judgeship.  Crews, who is currently a magistrate judge, was asked during his confirmation hearing how he'd evaluate a Brady motion.  He did not know what it is yet it forms one of the pillars of due process of law and any graduate of law school or person who passed the bar would know this.  Therefore it is fact that irrespective of any alleged credential he may have that allegedly "qualifies" him to be a lawyer -- or judge -- he never actually learned any of that material and thus did not actually earn the credential; how did he manage to get that seat?

Obviously Kato Crews' cultural values do not include actually mastering material before being given a credential, a rather basic precept in any honest society.

That people who fail this basic test are not and will not be immediately removed from any position of power and authority, no matter who they are, points directly toward an impending collapse in our nation's capacity to deliver all manner of things that are utterly-reliant on basic competence.  To refuse to demand ALL said persons' removal and back up that demand with whatever is necessary is a choice our society has made and it has consequences you are not going to like.

South Africa infamously had an "apartheid" government structure for 43 years; black people were formally and legally disadvantaged, unable to be treated as equals despite being in the majority of the population, from 1948 to 1994.  The nation, despite formal and legal segregation had a functional economy and government structure.  In the 25 years since that system was formally ended the nation has essentially devolved into gang violence, thuggery and is teetering on the collapse of basic goods and services such as production of basic foodstuffs (farming), electricity and water supply.  Please explain how, if there was no cultural or other significant difference whether in capacity or culture between the two groups this occurred and for extra credit please explain why anyone should consider assistance of any sort to this nation when the majority of the people there, who demanded equality and got it, are in fact fully and completely responsible for this breakdown in the basics of any civilized society and economy.

MASHELE: You've got a political crisis, which started in 1997, where the then-CEO of Eskom alerted government and told them that, if we do not get additional capacity in, we are going to start load shedding from 2007, which is exactly what happened.

Post-apartheid the electrical system operator warned the government that if they did not act to incentivize infrastructure and investment this would happen.  The newly-empowered majority government did nothing of the sort -- with fully ten years of fair warning -- and thus collapse it is.

Lest you think I'm bagging on people because of their race -- nope.  I'm bagging on people because of their culture and unwillingness to accept that which is when it comes to physical fact and deal with it.  Biden and his family anyone?  A wife in the family who gets a "payment" for no service of note?  A son who likes to smoke meth and, it appears, shower with underage girls in the family, never mind all manner of apparently-corrupt business dealings in multiple nations, being paid huge sums of money when he has zero relevant business or operational experience in the fields at hand.  This man winds up President, which tells me everything I need to know about the culture of this nation, particularly when his opponent in the other major political party just got done paying hospitals bonuses in the amount of tens of thousands of dollars per-person for procedures we knew did not work against a novel viral threat -- even when the patient died.

That is functionally equivalent to the Palestinians sending family members $10,000 when one of their sons wears a suicide vest and blows up a bunch of Israelis.  If that is an unacceptable act worthy of United States and international sanction tell me why the man who paid hospitals bonuses when they used known worthless treatments on your Grandmother and she died just had a huge crowd show up to cheer him on for a second Presidential run instead of running that rat bastard out of town?

When both major political parties post up candidates such as this and the people through their representative processes allow, enable and cause that to happen the cultural problem resides in us.

The instant rhetoric whenever someone engages in a school shooting is "ban guns."  How about banning thugs, virtually all of whom self-identify before the final incident?  We just had that happen in Denver, did we not?  I don't care how old you are or aren't or what race, sex or other "tribe" you belong to; if you're violent and disruptive you have no right to destroy the rights of others under some rubric of "equity."

You know, this thing called "The Rule of Law" which says when you demonstrate you're unfit to be in polite society through your actions we put you somewhere where you can't harm peaceful citizens.

I think they're called "prisons", but I could be mistaken.

There have always been thugs among humanity who, given the opportunity, will take advantage of others.  This is not new.  There have also always been narcissists among humanity who are absolutely certain they are the most-important person in the universe.

Positions of power attract these people just like crap attracts flies.

The entire reason we have an alleged "Rule of Law" and no "Divine Right Of Kings" in this nation, and such was ensconced in the Constitution of the United States is that history has shown repeatedly over more than two thousand years that as soon as you allow any group to be exempt from said laws the thugs are attracted there and you wind up with abused and dead people by the score.

Tell me again how Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted and imprisoned for sexually trafficking minors, managed to be convicted for that crime when not one person to whom she trafficked said minors to has been indicted, tried or imprisoned?  Its rather difficult to traffic minors for sex without someone consuming that service and in each and every case doing so is a serious felony.  If you believe the only person she "trafficked" them to was Epstein you're a few cans short of a sixpack; the flight logs from his aircraft make quite clear an awful lot of people were flying around on that plane, nearly all of them men and underage girls, and in addition no plausible legal explanation for where he got all of his money from has surfaced.  So where are the other prosecutions, convictions and imprisonments?  You see we still have "The Divine Right of Kings" don't we, and we, as Americans, have not sacked our government for continuing that practice despite it being the very reason this nation exists and why we shot all those British soldiers, ejecting them from America!

I'm supposed to be mad enough to ban guns over the shooting in Nashville despite the fact that a gun in the hands of a non-thug at that instant in time ended the slaughter?  At the same time 107 people, as of 3/20/2023 were shot and killed this year in Chicago, all but two of whom were apparently killed by thugs (the other two were, it appears, legitimate police stops of a thug-in-process.

The shooter in Nashville was apparently a 28 year old woman and the "early reports" were that she was apparently "in her teens."  Oh really?  Why isn't her name all over the place if she was known to be 28 years old and since when is a 28 year old apparently "in her teens"?

Then we find out -- the shooter, according to the Nashville cops, identified as a man and so gee, was biologically a woman. A copy of a social media profile with pronouns has been found.  Gee, no culture problem there right?  I get it, you didn't like being born with a slot between your legs instead of a hose.  I didn't like being born a dude who wasn't really all that good at hand-eye coordination sports because my right eye isn't as good as my left and thus, for example, I will never be any good at hitting a pitched baseball, but there's no "bionic" replacement so there's also nothing I can do about it as I was born this way.

I didn't go shoot up a school because I sucked at baseball when I was a kid nor did I demand people coddle me because I couldn't process an incoming baseball fast enough to accurately swing a bat at it.  Not do I have a right to play in the Major Leagues even though, no matter how much effort I put into training, I will never be capable of hitting a fastball.  Ever.

We all have something we'd rather be different.  The cultural difference between "well, that's how the cookie crumbles; I have to figure out how to deal with it" and "this is reason to scream, shout, demand accommodations and then go kill a bunch of people" is, well, rather profound.

WHICH DO YOU CHOOSE, AMERICA?

Rational response (this is who I am, like it or not, so I have to deal with it and figure out how to be ok with it) or kowtowing to the screaming demands of those who, when they don't get what they wish they were and can never be or have, turn rabid?

THIS IS THE CHOICE.

Biden's administration immediately tried to frame this as yet more "gun control" nonsense which is a nice attempt from deflection from the fact that he and his administration have funded the slaughter of tens of thousands of people in and around Ukraine which incidentally shielded wild-eyed corruption over there, was a direct beneficiary of our corruption of their political process and then "demanded" literal tanks in the streets -- and got them, from us.

Oh, never mind the LIE that there is no objective reality with it comes to things you cannot change and are fixed at the moment of conception too.

Why do I bring this up specifically?

Because its really all part of the same issue.  Prior to 1968 you could literally buy a gun out of the Sears Catalog by mail order and have it delivered to your door by the post office.  There was an entire section in the "wish catalog" that came out every fall before Christmas; I remember that catalog as a boy since the back part of it was Christmas toys.

Yet there was no such problem.  Indeed it was common for boys to have a shotgun in the rack of the back of their truck in rural areas because they went hunting after school with it.

Why was there no such problem?

Because if you were a thug or decided that your specific issues meant someone else had to kowtow to you our culture was that you were not allowed to get away with that crap -- you sucked it up or not, but you could not impose your insanity on others.  Oh sure, there were exceptions -- the mob in some cities and similar -- but not in the general case.  You hit a teacher or threw a chair at her you got expelled and your parents had to deal with finding a way to get you an education at their own expense.  You got neither an IEP or a "cry room" if you were incapable of being in the same space with others and not disrupting their learning.  If they didn't or couldn't act as parents you wound up having to fend for yourself.  If that ended with you in prison for life tough crap.  If you attacked someone else you got jailed.  If you did it again you got jailed for a lot longer and you got to break rocks or make license plates as your highest and best life achievement.  If you believed you were a woman trapped in a man's body, or vice-versa, you were told to suck it up buckwheat -- your chromosomes were set at conception and there's nothing you can do about it.   If you wanted to be wild-eyed crazy that was your prerogative until and unless you committed a criminal act against someone else -- and then off to jail you went.  If you were a man but liked to dress as a woman that was fine, but we still called you "Joe" and there was nothing you could do about it and no, you could not be on the woman's track or swim team.  We did not allow a parade of people to break the law coming into the United States and if you tried that you were summarily ejected, we did not allow a river of fentanyl to flow in via said illegal border crossings and we did not coddle people who committed violent offenses against others no matter their age.

Whatever gifts and abilities, for better or worse, you were born with that's what you had.  Our culture instilled the viewpoint that you should make the best use of your unique abilities to the best of your capacity, and if you choose not to for whatever reason that was fine -- but the cost of that decision was on you and nobody else.  If you tried to make it someone else's problem you'd be told "NO!" in a firm but compassionate manner -- and if you refused to accept that answer it would be enforced if necessary.

With this culture we advanced in this nation as no other country ever has over a similar period of time.  We conquered atomic energy for peaceful purpose, we put men on the moon multiple times, we built reusable spacecraft that could fly to orbit and return and we created and distributed all manner of apparently-miraculous things, including electric lights, electricity on demand, automobiles capable of being bought by the average person's salary, calculators you could hold in your hand, computers in an office, then on your desk and finally in your pocket and more.

But then over the last several decades we decided we could instead create and nurtured culture where flat-out false claims and demands for "equality" when in fact that is impossible are tolerated and even rewarded, such as the insane "reparations" nonsense out in San Francisco, claims that a man is in fact a woman., that one is entitled to a law or other degree or diploma if one hasn't learned the material and repeatedly releasing violent accused felons on trivial or even no bail whatsoever.  Friends of mine vacationing in Nashville a few months ago were held up at gunpoint overnight in their rental by armed thugs.  To the best of my knowledge the assailants have not been caught.  Anyone care to guess whether they had priors and if so why weren't they in prison?

A couple of years ago violent bands of thugs burned and looted cities all over this nation.  How many were imprisoned for a decade for committing arson or commercial looting?  Effectively zero.  What does that tell you about how our culture has evolved to consider such thuggery nothing more than a nice night out on the town?

It is all the same thing through this article and these examples -- culture.  We have enabled and celebrated thuggery in Mexico (drug gangs), China (Uyghurs, Christians, Muslims .et.al.) and right here in the United States (drug gangs, illegal immigrants slaughtering a girl in Iowa, BLM and antifa "mostly-peaceful protestors" and more.)

This has extended into our government with both Trump (paying hospitals a bonus when they kill you) and Biden (mandates that had no basis in law or fact, "defund the police" out of Harris, shielding from prosecution his son for apparent criminal acts and more) never mind our Congress which has enabled repeated scams and schemes (Solyndra and all the various Covid-time period rip-offs anyone) going back decades and accelerating on an unbroken basis over the last 20+ years.  Rather than punish the funding source for the 9/11 attacks (Saudi Arabia) we instead waged war on TWO nations that had nothing to do with it (Iran and Iraq) and killed a few million children in one of them; one of the most-outrageous examples of thuggery in human history explicitly endorsed and permitted by the American people.

Spare me the crocodile tears until our culture changes and we decide, as a body politic, that this crap is going to stop -- and mean it.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2023-01-14 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 1357 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

As many of you have read in these pages Ishmael has contributed several articles on the clown world challenges of the last few years.  No, that's not me writing under another name, and yes, it is one contributor.

Let me offer, at this point, a different perspective: We won, they lost.

The outcome was in doubt for quite some time.  But now, its not.

Rasmussen ran a poll not long ago and found a very large percentage of people who are convinced that someone they knew was seriously injured or killed by the vexxines.  Remember the old mantra -- safe and effective?  Its no longer an opinion that holds sway among the American people.

But its not just opinion anymore: Now its fact, as we keep seeing.  Report after report, even showing up in the mainstream media, of people taking the Fauci Flop.  Allegedly healthy people, even elite level athletes, suddenly collapsing and in many cases dying.

Reality is that everyone dies and death is not uncommon.  But unexpected, sudden death among people younger than 60 or so is quite unusual.  Especially among athletes and other people of prominence, except from drugs, which of course have always been a scourge and have claimed people all the time.  Elvis infamously died on the crapper and upon autopsy they found ten prescription drugs in size and a seriously damaged liver.  Not all that long ago my sister died under similar circumstances, and from similar root causes.  I've had friends who also succumbed from the same sort of abuse of substances and that sucks.

But many of these are not slow suicides by drug abuse -- or, for that matter, by potato chip and sugared beverages.  They're "side effects" of something peddled to the masses and everyone knows it.  Those who were conned are scared of meeting God and having to explain their personal insanity to him, thus that fearful look in their eye.  Their attacks on you both over the last two years and today are from that exact reason: They're scared they got it wrong and you had it right -- and they may be literally walking while already dead.  Those who conned others or worse, who were enforcers either through soft coercion or even literal force, such as politicians, police officers, CEOs and supervisory people are not just scared they might be next but that their particular fiefdom and ambitions are screwed, never mind their personal life and wealth, perhaps terminally so.

Good.

The suck that the so-called "mitigations" caused from destruction of two+ years of children's education and productivity in our economy is nowhere near finished.  In fact the worst of it is just starting.  A virus that for many including healthy young people was actually less dangerous than the flu has done what essentially every highly mutable respiratory virus does: Entropy is not a suggestion any more than the laws of thermodynamics (which is what gives rise to entropy, by the way) and nothing escapes it.  Covid followed the same pattern that OC43 did back in the 1890s when nobody knew a damn thing about the structure of viruses nor were there any shots.  Even with our tampering the laws of physics were not to be denied or evaded; man may create God in an image that suits him, but he can't make hydrogen and oxygen turn into gold instead of water.

There is a maxim I didn't much discuss when I was running a business (because I certainly preferred not to educate my competition!) which is that you don't make money selling things -- you make money when you buy them.  Its has and always will be true.  When you take advantage of someone else's stupidity (which you're not responsible for since you didn't contribute to the stupid act) you acquire an advantage your competitor cannot outrun or outmaneuver whether its in business or your personal life.  MCSNet managed several of these, with one of the larger being a deal we found for office space (which of course every business needs) that was at about 20% of the going rate as a result of another firm's stupidity.  I was able to capitalize on that because I had stashed back cash, acquire a five-year lease on said office space and the cost of operations advantage over others was immense -- and dropped immediately and durably to the firm's bottom line.

The "suck" is going to tempt you in the next few years to whine and cry.  Don't.  That's self-destructive, especially if it prompts you to do something stupid like drown yourself in a bottle of gin.  Instead, if you're one of the people who said "no" and meant it build reserves, live frugally, shed unnecessary debt and expenses and be patient.  The stupidity that has run through not just the United States but worldwide over the last three years has not been local or minor: It has been immense, it has crossed nearly all professions and it has sucked into its maw the majority of Americans, say much less those in other nations.  The opportunities this will generate are also going to be immense, particularly when coupled with all the other stupidity of the last 20 years, including so-called "diversity hiring."  Just look at one minor piece of this -- the recent NOTAM meltdown in civil aviation.  NOTAMs even got "diversity renamed" to Notice to Air Missions when in fact it is Notice to Airmen.  It really is a trivial problem from a computing point of view; just a list of notices that deal with a specific route or place to warn pilots of local and abnormal conditions, such as a restriction on flying into a given set of coordinates during a certain time.  I could probably code up a system to do this in a weekend and run it in a single rack of equipment for the entire nation, then triplicate that in three strategic locations so there are two always-on spares -- literally.  Well, the FAA apparently did not care about making sure this "non-safety critical" (after all, if it fails it doesn't directly crash a plane) system actually worked and was redundant, and it failed.  The problem is that without it you can't fly because if you take off without having the NOTAMs for the area you're operating in and go somewhere you can't as a pilot your ticket gets punched, so said failure basically grounded the entire US non-military aviation system, commercial and civilian, for several hours.

This occurred because the stupid has run rampant throughout or civil and government systems where competence is no longer the gating factor to employment and supervisory positions but rather has been replaced with blind obedience to whatever the flavor of the day happens to be whether its hiring someone due to their skin color or their pronouns and then, in the last couple of years, whether they damaged their bodies stupidly because of a bunch of money-grubbing jackasses along with their enablers in the media and government.

All this will unwind and those who did the stupid things will be the ones who pay for it.  Yes, you'll have to live through the suck and we're all going to have to deal with that.  If you're younger you have never lived through a real suck.  That must be nice.  I'm almost 60 and I did -- both little sucks (e.g. early 1990s) and one pretty nasty one in the late 70s and early 80s which was caused by stupidity and arrogance, just like this one.  That latter one went on for about five years before it turned and started to improve but if you were prepared and took advantage you did damn well.  I was both too young and personally stupid at the time but I learned from that and in the 1990s pounced on its little brother.  That smaller one came at a great time for me professionally and was a big part of MCSNet being successful.  Some people levered up and won but most who did that lost with many literally losing everything.  The prepared who didn't lever up did quite well without the risk of a zero; winning less is ok unless you're a pig, in which case go ahead and grab for that Ring of Power -- just don't whine if you fall off the cliff into the lava instead of getting it.

Those of you who said NO -- the most-powerful single word in the English language -- are already winning.  You don't wake up every morning wondering if tonight you will go to bed and never wake up from a clot you throw in your sleep.  You might have been persecuted, fired and ostracized but you have your health and are not wondering if there's a ticking time bomb in your chest.

You should contemplate putting your unvexxed status everywhere -- including especially on resumes.

Wear it proudly -- you were RIGHT and its a perfectly-valid marketing point to use both personally and professionally.

Those who cheated (e.g. bribing the doc $50 to squirt it in the trash) are arguably in the worst situation of all.  You branded your own chart by doing that and in today's world with EMR (electronic medical records) you can never undo it.  If you ever used that fake credential you committed an offense against the person who you gave it to and might have committed a crime but even if it wasn't a crime if and when you get caught (and yes, it is possible for it to be proved you never got the actual shots) or try to walk it back you risk being blackballed in your industry or worse, particularly if your profession has ethics clauses -- and many professions do.  Even if you can't be blackballed you marked yourself as untrustworthy, and that cannot be reversed.

The consequences from all of this stupidity are going to have to go through the system and this is not going to be "over and done" as if nothing happened next week -- or next year.  But those consequences are going to create tremendous opportunities.   All-cause mortality is currently running in the high single-digits to around 12% all over the world, it is not coming back down materially and that is not a small figure.

Then there's disability, which is doing its best impression of a skyrocket just after launch:

 

Note the dip in "disabled" as we went into 2020; that was disabled people dying from the virus.  They were medically fragile and succumbed; we know this virus was especially ugly in those who were already seriously medically compromised, and that shouldn't have surprised anyone.  But what happened afterward and why, even though Omicron has been the dominant virus form for the last year and it kills almost nobody, has that trend in disability gone vertical?  Those newly-minted medically-fragile are the new screwed -- and they did it to themselves.  Perhaps this will level off in the next year or two and stop but if it doesn't, and the evidence thus far is that it is not slowing down, asset prices are going to collapse in many areas and those who are healthy and didn't screw themselves will be writing their own ticket, which will go a hell of a lot further when it comes to standard of living than it did five or ten years ago.

Take a million and a half extra people out of the workforce every year just from disability and perhaps 1/5th of that again in deaths on top of the normal everyday rate and guess what: That's almost exactly the 3% rate of "seriously screwed" I predicted and what this data appears to show was a pretty darn good educated guess.

The rage over the last couple of years was surcharging people's health insurance for refusing the jab as a punitive, coercive act.  On a forward basis those who took it may find themselves uninsurable at any price, never mind life insurance and those who refused have every right and should demand all of those surcharges back in cash, with interest at today's higher rates.  This is where you'll get caught if you try to lie too, because both the damage and residuals from taking the vexxine is almost-certainly going to be detectable and will be looked for.  Elevated troponins or even worse LGE on a cardiac MRI are impossible to hide.  Yeah, Obamacare will be there but for the healthy this means subsidy levels for decent insurance will go way up and that's good if you don't need it because it means you can have reasonable coverage for little or no cost.  In private business when this worm turns the screwed may find themselves unemployable at anything other than part-time, no-health-insurance jobs as the prognosis for those with LGE is both very poor and hideously expensive.  Then there are all the younger people still in or before their childbearing/siring years -- you have to be out of your damned mind as a young man or woman to date with the intent to marry and try to create children with a vexxed partner when you have the choice of a someone who didn't take it -- and you do.  Three percent doesn't sound all that bad but it is: Do you like adding a one in thirty risk that your husband or wife-to-be is mortally wounded and going to stick you with both the psychic and economic costs of their prior decision two, five or ten years down the road, never mind the possibility of being unknowingly unable to have children?  How about the recent study that found evidence of cardiac damage in nearly one in five young people?

How do you like those odds if you're a young man or woman?

Choose wisely -- which means unvexxed.  Let the vexxed have each other and whatever misery comes to them.  They bought the ticket; don't take their ride for them.

Here's my take: Those who thought for themselves, read the available information and then stuck up the middle finger at the people attempting to convince them to take the vexxines not only will win they have already and will keep winning.  Be smart now and into the future, build reserves, live frugally so you're prepared and be patient; you're not just winning now, today and here you're going to continue winning and those who made the other decision are going to continue losing both now and well into the future.  Not everyone who did a dumb thing will lose but in terms of economic impact that does not matter; all that matters is that many, far more than usual in our society, did a stupid thing and you will be able to take advantage when they are awarded their stupid prize.  If you do that and keep your powder dry five years from now you're odds-on to have a big fat grin on your face.

When all is said and done I expect mRNA to be consigned to the dustbin of history, the worst of a bad set of medical experiments run on entire populations without cause -- and those firms involved in it are going to be severely damaged if not (as in the case of one-trick-ponies) utterly destroyed.  Biotech firms blowing up is nothing new; they do it all the time and most of them fail.  The only difference here is the size of the detonations as a result of the stupidity of attempting to use unproved medical technology on a mass basis.

Do not expect the economic and sociological impact will be over or "back to normal" in a year.  If we're lucky in five years we'll be coming out of it; if not it might be a decade or even longer.  But those who made smart decisions will be the winners on a statistical basis and already are winning.

Hold your head high if "screw you!" was your answer to this garbage.

You were right and it is rapidly becoming consensus whether the media and so-called "bigwigs" like it or not.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2022-09-16 13:53 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 484 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

So CDC, NIH and others are over-reach and bullshit extraordinaire.

I was asked to speak on this briefly today.  And did.

Then the conversation went toward "smart meters" and the overtones of "5g."

Jesus, cut the shit folks.

So-called "smart meters" are nearly all Zigbee-style devices which is a quite-common option for home automation.  This is a mesh technology and typically runs in the same bands as your WiFi router does, with less power in terms of ERP (effective radiative power) than your cellphone -- and not by a little either, given the wild difference in distance between the device and you.

The reason the power companies use this is because it can be certificate-based for security and thus is quite secure from interception or tampering, which is a really big deal when you're talking about people's power bill never mind being shut off if you don't pay.  While they could have designed their own why re-invent what already exists and is available to anyone who wants to use it when that is perfectly-suitable to the task and quite secure?

Here's an ARRL document on them, which is entirely accurate by the way.  902 Mhz is very close to the Z-wave US frequency (908 Mhz) and I've had that stuff all over my house for over ten years.  You probably have too, since it was one of the earlier "cordless phone" frequencies (nowdays most are on 2.4Ghz.)

FCC power requirements limit such a meter to one watt of RF power.  For comparison your cellphone is tower-controlled as to power level but, because you walk around with it near and on your body (which attenuates the signal thus can cause the power required to go up) its limited to 600mw, or 0.6w, which is the maximum for a handheld device.

A common ham radio HT or "walkie talkie" has both a 1W and 5W setting.  I own two.  My ham "base" transceiver has a base power level settable of up to fifty watts but the power I'm allowed to run depends on the band I'm operating on and, depending on the band and the power limits associated with amateur radio use on same I can run a linear amplifier behind that and boost the power to ten or more times that level.

I also used to work on Ku and C band microwave transmitters and in fact did control software for some of them; the C-band klystron units, in particular, had rated power outputs into the kilowatt range, with TWT units typically having rated outputs around 300-600 watts.  These were continuous ratings, not "burst" or "pulsed".

All of RF is, as you learn if you ever study it, subject to the inverse-square law.  This is why the local FM radio station frequently runs somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 watts of output power yet at your radio the signal level received by the antenna is tiny.

Thus while your meter may emit 1 watt and your cellphone is 6/10ths of that the meter is almost-certainly a hell of a lot further away from you than the phone just as your FM radio or TV is from the transmitter and thus the actual power you are exposed to is a tiny fraction of that from your cellular device, laptop connected via WiFi (which of course is transmitting) and similar.

In addition the meter transmits on a periodic basis because all the others within "listening range" have to not be transmitting at the same time or they will "step on" each other since they're all on the same frequency band.  The "mesh" is what makes this work; in short your neighbor "helps" your signal get to one of the utility company's antennas and vice-versa.  This is, of course, wildly different than what happens when you use a cellphone, PDA or laptop where your transmission is for you -- and only you.

In short the argument is bullshit unless, of course, you have no electronic devices in your house and do not live anywhere near a transmitting radio or TV station, nor do you have a transformer (which also emits EMF) on the pole or pedestal outside your home.  Well, perhaps not if you're Amish.  For everyone else?  It's crap.  Period.

The other argument is "dirty power."  Guess what I own?  A Tek digital storage oscilloscope, with which I can trivially look at the power quality coming from my AC outlets just as easily as I can use it to design, diagnose and fix electronics.  I have.  The claim is nonsense.

Why do power companies love smart meters?  Because they don't have to send people out to read them, so their costs are lower.  In addition nearly all (if not all) have a remote disconnect capability.  This cannot be used to shut you off for load management as its not designed to be used on a regular basis (it has a rated connect/disconnect under load life of perhaps a hundred cycles) so in terms of a "rolling blackout" that's not how they'll do it -- if they try they'll be buying a lot of new meters when the contacts fail.

But if you don't pay your bill, well, that's a "once in a while" deal and yeah, they can and do use it that way since now they don't need to send someone out to remove the meter from the socket and potentially meet the deadbeat with a 12ga shotgun who's rather interested in them not removing it and thus shutting their power off.

What I was asked to speak to was CDC overreach and my view that the agency should be destroyed, as their malfeasance and misfeasance, all of it intentional, goes back decades and is well-documented as is that of the FDA and NIH.  AIDS was one of the most-egregious examples but hardly the only one prior to Covid, never mind the CDC's refusal to actually act within their authority and seize and destroy contaminated items in interstate supply (such as E-coli contaminated food), which under statute they are empowered to do.

Nonetheless I refuse to have my name associated with bullshit and, while I'm polite enough not to call it out while on the Zoom, it shall not pass without my commentary here, on the record and exempt from roll-off.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2022-01-31 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 2787 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

.... I'll go ahead and take one.

I, like Dr. Noorchashm, have some concerns with Dr. Kory and loud advocacy down one specific road.  I understand where he's coming from: When someone tries to silence debate rather than engage in it the only way to break through the intentional wall is to yell louder, or shoot the persons building the wall.

Since the latter is frowned upon in a polite society we're left with the other option.

Nonetheless I object -- and have -- to a single-minded focus.  By definition it fails to account for acquired knowledge over time, never mind being exactly what the other side is doing.

As for calling Dr. Kory's view a scheme, that's over the line.  In fact, its likely actionable, specifically when couched in the claim, no matter how-carefully wrapped, that unlawful acts are taking place.  Which Noorchashm did, I remind you.

As someone who has had Covid-19 and hit it with repurposed drugs, all of which I had to source outside of alleged "professional advice", and having successfully treated my own person with same, knowing it was Covid because I seroconverted and proved that both before (being negative) and after (being positive) the fact, again, without any professional assistance from your so-called "profession" because it was denied me, never mind formal refusal at the time to be given monoclonal antibodies because I was not fat, over 65, diabetic or non-white I think I have plenty of reason to ride your ass and that of the "orthodoxy."

Yes, I know my experience is called "an anecdote" or a "case study" and is not proof.  It is, however, my experience and thus stands as it is, like it or not.

I have every right to relate my personal experience to others.

Yes, I refused to take these so-called "vaccines" prior to getting Delta.  Why?  Many reasons, and I will list them again since otherwise you'd have to go back and read my work over the 18 months prior to my getting hit:

  • Insufficient data on intermediate and long-term effects.  I can't "un-take" a shot and whatever it does, it does.  Since the firms in question were given a nearly-blanket and impenetrable liability shield I trust exactly nothing out of their mouths or anyone else's derived from their claims (that includes all the so-called "experts") because there is no way for me (or my heirs) to go to court and pound them if the product proves defective.

  • Zero evidence of long-term protection and, from the titers raised by the EUA trials, evidence that the manufacturers knew the protection, to whatever degree it was conferred, was temporary.  This, standing alone, meant that whatever the risk profile was from the jabs it was almost-certainly not a one-time bargain.  What we didn't (and still don't) know is what the multiplicative factor is with repeated insults.  No matter how small a risk is if you put an exponential multiplier on it enough times you're going to get screwed.  I did not fail math in High School.

  • Zero evidence that as the artificially-high titer waned binding capability would not remain.  That's especially bad because it raises a direct and profound risk of VEI -- that is, enhanced disease either to the original virus or to other related viruses to which those binding antibodies can attach.  This risk, if it occurs, is catastrophic to the person who got the jab and impossible to mitigate later.  It requires years to know whether this will happen with regular, in-depth follow-up which obviously couldn't be done originally due to time constraints and isn't being done now on a systemic basis.

  • The mRNA technology in particular is one that has no track record at all and in fact the record is of 10+ years of failure for other indications, including cancer, where fairly high levels of potential harm are tolerated because the alternative is certain death.  It therefore requires years of evidence to convince me that "this time its different" and nothing other than time and a full exposition of the data over that time will convince me.

  • All of the jabs used in the United States, without exception, hijack your cells to produce the material your immune system then notices and attacks.  This is very different than direct introduction of the material to which your immune system is expected to respond as with all of the inoculations we commonly use in that the latter does not implicate your own tissues in the potential immune response while the former inescapably does.  This raises the risk of autoimmune attack which, if it occurs, can be permanent and severely disable or even kill you.  Without decades of proof that this does not occur, given that we understand the causes of autoimmune disease very poorly to begin with, such jabs posed a potentially extreme risk of permanent disability with no way to qualify how great that risk might be.

  • I was, at the time, while of moderately-advanced age (57) healthy with no co-morbid factors and therefore was not at elevated risk other than for age.  I am not fat or diabetic, my blood pressure is not high, I am not asthmatic, I do not have (or have had) cancer, my lungs and other organs function properly, my immune system function is normal, I consume no prescription drugs for any indication on a regular basis and I'm quite athletic, able to and do run at distances up half-marathons regularly.  The data out of NY's coroner made clear that age is not, standing alone, a morbid factor for this disease and I suffered from none of the factors that were implicated in that data set for increased risk.

  • I had every reason to believe that Covid-19, like essentially every other virus, would confer upon me durable immunity if I became infected and survived.  That immunity might not be life-long or perfect but the odds that it would not be protective against a severe or fatal outcome on a permanent or nearly-so basis was, on the historical evidence, statistically-indistinguishable from zero.  Indeed at the start of this pandemic we had scientific evidence already in on SARS-1 with people who had been infected and survived having knowledge of, and thus protection against, serious outcomes more than a decade later.  Since that is also a coronavirus and was well-studied there never was and still isn't reason to believe that infection was not durably protective.

  • I had concerns based on the data, starting in early summer of 2021, that the jabs might interfere with the building of natural immunity if I took them and then got infected anyway.  Only significant passage of time (years or even a decade or more) can exclude this risk (OAS) and if it occurs, given that coronaviruses mutate at a very rapid rate compared with other viral families, it could kill you on reinfection with a mutated strain by causing your immune response to be ineffective down the road.  Since I had reason to believe the protection from the jabs was not durable this became of particular concern to me by about June of 2021, and reinforced my decision to that point that taking the shots would be foolish given my specific underlying risk profile.

  • I had been following the repurposed drug situation, the "accidental natural experiments" with said drugs and the correlations with same since March of 2020 in depth.  Having read well north of 200 medical papers on the subject over the previous year I had a decent understanding of how the disease progressed, what was likely to work to interdict it during its different phases, which of those had very small to vanishingly small risk of severe side effects and I was able to obtain and stock back interventions that I believed might be effective, some of which were pharmaceuticals and others of which were classified as supplements.  I also read of correlating factors for severe disease (specifically Vitamin D deficiency) and that is trivially able to be insured against for pennies in other than the summer months (in summer its free), which I did. I was thus confident that whatever my baseline risk of being hospitalized or killed was I would be able to put another zero on the "won't have that happen" odds between these factors.

Given all of the above the decision was not difficult at all.  I had a large body of unknowns that could not be discovered for a period of years, some of which if they became realized risks would be catastrophic or even immediately fatal.  As time had gone on additional serious risks were discovered to be potentially in play, none of which had been addressed, discussed or disproved.  On the other side of the scale was about a year of knowledge of the disease etiology, its mechanisms of damage to the body, how certain personal health factors influenced that and what mitigations had statistical correlation with interdicting it.

I made my decision, I was ultimately infected, I used the drugs and supplements that I believed would be of benefit and while Delta was no cake-walk the outcome was success.  I neither went to the hospital or died, and I have no long-term discernable effects from the event, other than an IgG antibody titer that persists to this day (last checked a couple of weeks ago.)  In fact on an objective cardio-pulmonary basis the impact of my infection with the "evil" Delta was materially less than that which I suffered from whatever got me in the first week of January 2020, which was likely (although I can't prove it) H1N1.  That infection took more than six months to fully recover from in terms of cardio capacity!

Of course then the so-called "good doctor".... goes here.

But what is more concerning to me is that you three do so, while expressing unusual zeal for ignoring the established principles of Immunological science, as licensed American physicians to vocally disparage and dissuade millions of Americans, who have already lost trust in their government and expert institutions, from becoming immunized against COVID-19. This is a critical medical and ethical judgement failure on your parts.

Well, to put not fine a point on it: Bullshit.

There is no clear balance of risks and benefits for the jabs that applies on a blanket basis.  This is in fact true for every immunological product and indeed for every drug irrespective of its class or purpose.  I would not take a varicella shot for one simple reason: I already had chicken pox and thus it offers me nothing but risk.  Yes, the risk from that shot is extremely small but when measured against zero benefit you would be stupid to allow anyone to give it to you.

Yet when it comes to Covid-19 this is precisely the problem -- we had a decent part of the population as of December of 2020, before the first jab went into anyone on a widespread basis, that had already had Covid-19.  So where was the loud outcry then and where is it now, or even threats to revoke medical licenses for giving the jabs to people who already had the disease?  Even the CDC now admits there is zero statistical benefit to receiving one or more such jabs if you have previously been infected.  Such a recommendation or even demand is thus nothing more than risk, including the risk of death, without the possibility of benefit and yet even today the CDC and everyone else screams at people to get jabbed and boosted even if they've been previously infected and recovered!

The jabs originally looked like a fairly decent risk:benefit gamble for those in nursing homes and otherwise at very high risk, but who had not been previously infected, at the outset.  I said so at the time, quite-clearly -- even with all the unknowns given that we knew of a roughly 5% infection mortality rate in severely-compromised people, plus the fact that the average survival time for a person admitted to a nursing home is six months the choice to be jabbed was, on the basis of available data, reasonably determinable as odds-on for such persons.

For everyone else the decision was never that clear.

This, even with what was trivially-discernible as trials that failed to demonstrate either sterilizing immunity or durable protection.  Three months is not durable.  In addition indications that the trials were gamed were present all the way back when they began.

Now, with more time, we've developed information that is more adverse to both the safety and efficacy of the shots!

Indeed the reported rate of serious complications and death from these jabs looks to be some one hundred times that of another common non-sterilizing (and often worthless or nearly so) inoculation we hand out to over 100 million Americans a year -- the flu shot.

When all the "errors" go one way it is extremely likely they're not errors at all -- they're probably intentional -- because errors do not have a directional bias.

Why should not Dr. Kory present the position that the risk and benefit equation is not clear, it is certainly not clear for younger, healthy people and the data was deliberately screwed with to make it look better than it was?

All of which is true, by the way.

How bad is what appears to be the deliberate skewing of the data?  We don't know and thus we cannot put boundaries on it or prove it.

We can't look.  So says Pfizer, Moderna and J&J.  So says the FDA.

"Eat this, inject that!" says the doctor.

"Show me the data", says I.

"No." says the doctor and the government.

Well then fuck you sir, and may the plague of a thousand locusts descend upon your home, your assets, your clothing and your penis.

Especially when you further tilt the scales by actively denying people the right to choose mitigating drugs that, to the extent each or all of them work, make the risk:reward benefit calculation adverse to getting the shots.

Speaking of risk and reward how about Remdesivir.  Or, as I've taken to call it, Run-Death-Is-Near.  A drug with a known toxicological problem, specifically to the kidneys, that is a multiple-time loser, including with Ebola where it not only didn't help it led to higher rather than lower mortality rates and thus was stopped during the trials.  May I remind you that Solidarity, a fairly large-scale trial, said Remdesivir was worthless?  These results were reported in the NEJM close to one year ago yet hospitals in the US are still pumping people full of that crap today.

The reality is that our federal public health agencies have badly failed at accurate and honest messaging about the vaccine and its efficacy. The vaccine’s presentation by Mr. Biden’s administration as a binary silver bullet was an error that only stoked more mistrust, when its inefficacies became visible with the growing environmental viral load. 

It was not an error: It was an intentional lie and it pervaded not only Biden's Administration but Trump's as well and still does right now and here at the FDA, which claims the shots PREVENT the disease.

Indeed the FDA has now added Moderna's "Spikevax" to the list of lies, claiming also that it prevents the disease.

They do not.

We know this conclusively; exactly none of them provide the at least one year, 50% or better protection against infection and transmission that the FDA has historically required as a minimum, which is (usually) barely met by the flu shot.

The original trials were never powered to detect whether these jabs met that criteria, nor was the routine testing and follow-up done to detect it either -- on purpose.

Therefore any claim that these jabs prevent the disease was and is not an error -- it is intentionally false, especially given the data we have now.

The antibody titers produced were wildly beyond that from natural infection without any explanation as to why.  A reasonable explanation is that the manufacturers either knew or suspected that (1) the protection would rapidly wane and thus gamed the test so as to pass the deliberately-short timeframe required to sell them and (2) viral evasion due to mutation was likely.  Worse, setting the titer there while serving to conceal the failure and thus sell product may have also potentiated enhanced binding antibody levels, that is, vaccine-enhanced disease over time which would not become evident until after the trials were complete and 200 million Americans got jabbed.

Which, sadly, we may now be seeing with Omicron and even with Delta.

Can I prove the latter?  Not yet.  But if turns out to be true what are you going to do about it?

Oh by the way, every prior attempt at vaccination against a coronavirus ended in this sort of failure.  The entity that claims it doesn't this time carries the burden of proof and it better be iron-clad proof too because if you're wrong the harms can be catastrophic.

See, that's why we don't do this sort of thing as a rule and anyone who is intellectually honest both knows and admits it: This risk is real, if it happens you screw an utterly huge number of people, the screwing is likely to be long-term or even permanent and there's nothing you can do about it.

Is not allegedly the "prime directive" in medicine First, do no harm?

Well now..... experimental jabs, liability shields, using known toxic drugs that have repeatedly failed trials due to safety and in fact has repeatedly caused mortal injury in those trials on a widespread basis in hospitals and systematically denying access to drugs that have decades-long safety records to people at the earliest sign of illness.

Doctor, hypocrisy much?

BUT, none of these federal failures, nor any of Dr. Fauci’s prejudices and errors (or even the alleged corruption my friend, RFK Jr., elaborates on in his new book), justify anyone, especially three seemingly decorated and licensed American physicians, acting to compound the harm to America and American institutions, by disparaging UN-IMMUNE persons from becoming vaccinated.

There might be a reason for it sir.  The above may well be the reason.

Now let's talk about the jabs specifically.

The truth is that COVID-19 vaccine induce a powerful Adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein in the majority of vaccinated persons. This immune response, though it wanes and requires boosters in some, protects the majority of the vaccinated from severe illness. It protects the majority from becoming infected. It reduces transmission in the majority.

Only the first statement in that paragraph has factual basis.  The rest are conjecture and require balance, which you refuse to provide.  Indeed, you deny it even in the face of large-scale "natural experiments" such as in Israel and Denmark where, the data now shows, against Omicron the jabs are worse than worthless; they make infection more likely.

Indeed the data is that even against the pre-Delta variants this was true until two weeks after the jab sequence was completed.  That is, you were temporarily made more-susceptible and this pattern of wildly-increased infection occurred in every state and nation where jab rollouts commenced exactly when it commenced.  You and everyone else dismissed this by falsely claiming these people were "unvaccinated".  If you are offering jabs into the middle of a pandemic then an infection that occurs at any time after the jab is accepted must count against the vaccine's effectiveness.  It is your profession that chooses when to offer and recommend said jabs, I remind you and thus if you choose to administer them into a spike of infections and they make that worse that outcome counts against the intervention you prescribed.

Why should I ever believe someone in the future when it comes to my health once I prove they've liedMany have, and they claim to be experts.  "You become a dead end to the virus" if you get jabbed?  "Vaccinated people do not carry the virus -- they don't get sick"?  Yeah, Rachel Maddow is not an expert at anything except having diarrhea of the mouth.  How about Fauci, Walensky and Bouria?  Is not the latter the CEO of one of the companies making these products?  Are not the former two those who encouraged lockdowns, mandatory masking, mandatory vaccinations and more?  All three claim to be subject-matter experts and all three were completely full of crap.

Indeed there is evidence that the original trials were deliberately gamed and thus were frauds.  I've gone over this in substantial detail.  Can I prove it?  Not without subpoenas but eventually someone is going to get through that wall.  How is it that you accept alleged "trial" data that is generated and filtered only by the interested parties and which nobody else can look at, especially after the first batch of it is proved to be garbage?  It's not like pharmaceutical companies have lied before, right?  Oh wait, they have, and have been charged, prosecuted and punished for it.  Do you believe a bank robber who has been convicted will not rob a bank in the future?  Why would believe a pharmaceutical company that has been caught cheating would not cheat again, especially when they try to hide data from the public for decades and in fact go to court in an attempt to block its release?  How about when those same firms execute contracts with governments that require the government to indemnify them if, in the future, it is proved the product is defective?  We know they did exactly that because those agreements have been leaked and published.

Further, and perhaps most-seriously, we knew very early on that viremia, that is, virus in the bloodstream, including the spike, only occurred with severe and fatal cases of Covid-19.  We also knew starting in September of 2020 and documented by December that the spike alone, absent the rest of the virus, was pathogenic in the human body, specifically in the endothelium.  It is thus a reasonable belief that when someone ends up in the hospital or dead from Covid-19 this is likely the root cause at least some of the time -- and maybe all of the time.

It is impossible to inject something without some of it ending up in the circulation -- that is, in and around the endothelium.  That begs the obvious question as to which is more-dangerous: A definite exposure of your endothelium to the spike from an injection or a possible one from infection if, and only if, you get severely hammered?  Nobody knows and nobody has done the work to find out.  Despite the signal in December of 2020 we went ahead anyway without first disproving that the balance of harms went the wrong way especially in healthy, low-risk individuals.

On top of this we knew very early on that there was no reduction in transmission from the jabs; a person who had a "breakthrough" was just as infectious (per Fauci and the CDC itself) and thus might be more-dangerous because by hiding symptoms you make the problem worse.  If I do not know I'm sick I will not self-isolate in my home since I have no reason to suspect I'm infected.  An inoculation that does not prevent infection, replication or transmission but prevents symptom expression is thus not only bad from a public health perspective its disastrous.  Indeed one can reasonably make the argument that intentional blinding of symptoms is involuntary manslaughter.  We have historical precedent for this, incidentally, in the fiasco surrounding the DTP vaccine in the 1970s and the twenty-fold higher case rate for pertussis today after the formula for that jab was changed to DTaP, a non-sterilizing inoculation that prevents neither infection or transmission.  Do you think I can't read history and the CDC's own data on pertussis cases?

What's worse is that we now know the jabs don't work with any degree or durability at all.  How do we know this?  Because the CDC has proved it with their own contemporary data, that's how.  The >65 cohort is the most vaccinated in the United States.  Indeed, the CDC says that 88.3% of those >65 have been fully vaccinated, and 64.3% have received boosters, that is, the third shot.

The proof they don't work is that the CDC also reports that hospitalization among those >65 for Covid is roughly as high or higher this winter as it was last winter when there were no shots.  With nearly 90% of that age cohort fully vaccinated across the entire United States if the jabs worked to prevent severe disease we would see a ratable decrease in hospitalization among that cohort.  Indeed, since we know natural immunity is protective against severe disease for much longer than the jabs, at least one year, again by the CDC's own data, if the jabs did nothing we'd expect to see a lower rate among that segment of the population simply because many of them already had the virus and survived.  There are simply not enough unvaccinated and uninfected seniors remaining if the jabs work and yet there is in fact no decrease at all compared with last winter's surge among the most-vaccinated population subgroup.

This strongly implies that what the jabs are doing is producing VEI (vaccine-enhanced infection); that is, causing actual harm and either wildly potentiating first infections or, far worse, destroying immunity from infection whether prior to or subsequent to vaccination such that people are getting the virus a second or subsequent time and not mildly either; they're getting hammered since this is not relying on "infections", it's hospitalizations.  We knew the latter was likely this summer, incidentally, because "N" protein seroprevalence in Britain flatlined during Delta -- an impossibility unless the vaccine was interfering with building that titer or destroyed existing antibody titers if jabbed after being infected and recovered.

Never mind that there's evidence these jabs may be back-boosting other common coronaviruses.  That was known to be a risk in May of 2021.  We see that in the data too; people showing up in the ER and Urgent Care with "covid-like illness" but they don't have Covid, and a huge percentage of them are vaccinated.  Are these jabs turning the common OC43 and HKU1 coronaviruses, that usually produce mild colds, into severe disease events?  Maybe -- and we knew they might in May of last year but didn't bother to follow up on that either.  Since OC43 is believed to have been the cause of a Covid-like pandemic in the 1890s if this proves up we will have screwed millions of Americans -- or even perhaps tens of millions -- instead of helping them.

But, even then, systematic off-label use of controversial and unvetted drugs in millions of Americans would be a very questionable practice. 

What is "controversial" and "unvetted" about a drug that has a 30+ year record with nearly four billion human doses consumed worldwide and, of course, all of the results of same in evidence?  You can run all the teeny little trials you want but you will never get the statistical power on safety that comes from decades of widespread use.  We have that for Ivermectin.  We have it to a lesser, but still powerful extent, for hydroxychloroquine.  I know people who are using Plaquenil and have been for an extended period of time for chronic conditions.  They're not falling over dead while this specific use would be for a week or so at maximum.

How about budesonide?  We dose people with systemic steroids all the time; prednisone to name one.  We know its safety profile quite well, because we use it for a whole host of other reasons.  Budesonide, as an inhaled steroid, has much less systemic effect yet it concentrates the effect where you want it if Covid gets out of hand on you before you get sick enough that your O2Sat collapses -- in the lungs.  Is it 100% safe?  Of course not.  No drug is.

What if I demand those things, take them, and they do nothing?  So what?  Your alternative on offer was chicken soup!  Unless the drugs harm me in short-term, acute use I can't be worse off than what you offered me as an alternative, which was nothing!

Explain to why you believe you have the right to deny me that choice.

I remind you that in a tiny little nation called Mexico to our south these drugs are sold over the counter.  Indeed you can buy Zpak, HCQ and Ivermectin there for just a few dollars without any gatekeeping whatsoever by the medical "profession."

If your argument is that such active denial "encourages" your preferred path I have a word for that and it has a punishment too: Extortion.

Close to one year ago I posted a list of lies from physicians and alleged public-health experts.  Indeed it is precisely your group that has spent close to the last two years claiming a physical impossibility: That a mask could and will stop an aerosol virus.  You and your pals, in short, have and still argue that a chain-link fence around my porch will stop mosquitoes from biting me.  In addition to not failing math I also did not fail physics.

At the same time you so-called experts have refused to follow up on alleged Covid cases (that is, PCR+) with an inexpensive, couple of dollar fingerstick antibody tests two weeks later.  Why is this important?  Because a person who comes positive on a PCR test at Ct40 likely never had the virus at all.  Since none of the labs report the Ct value to the patient said person has no idea if their "positive" denotes a nearly-certain infection with Covid or one that is wildly-improbable to be a true positive.  In the latter case if they were sick they had something else.  If they weren't sick they had nothing,  In both cases they may well still be susceptible.  By calling them "sick and now recovered" you caused them to take risk they would otherwise not take, and this also became (and still is!) part of your argument for "everyone must get jabbed."

But if they do follow up and a huge percentage of the so-called "had Covid" people find out they were lied to and never had the virus perhaps that would be bad..... Indeed it might lead to a very-justified call for heads if your profession quarantined and economically destroyed tens of millions of Americans who weren't actually sick.

I had to go "outside the lines" to source these tests on my own.  I did so.

It is my sincere hope that any American reading my opinion here will think carefully about the best way to protect themselves from COVID-19. 

On this we agree entirely.  I have done so since this first began.  Indeed that is part of being an adult.

But my attempts to do so, including to document whether what I had in January of 2020 was Covid, have been intentionally, willfully and maliciously interfered with by people just like you.  My access to safe drugs that, on reading of hundreds of formal studies, some great, some not-so-great, some undoubtedly riddled with errors and even lies was refused even though said drugs are in fact as safe or safer than those I can buy over the counter in the local WalMart or CVS.

I can buy all the allergy meds I want without proof that I have an allergy.  I can buy all the Tylenol I want without proof that I have a headache or fever.  Why can't I buy a drug that is, on the data, roughly one hundred times safer than Tylenol?

The bottom line is this: Until and unless you have a proved-effective alternative on offer at the same point in the progression of disease there is no argument ever for interfering with someone using a safe drug irrespective of whether you believe, or can prove, that it works.  The test for this must be simple, binary and put into law NOW: If I can buy something as safe or safer over the counter then I can buy this if I so choose, period.  It's my ass and thus must be my choice when all you will offer in the alternative is nothing at all.

The reason is trivially-easy to understand:  If a person uses it and it doesn't work provided its safe they're no worse off than eating the chicken soup.

We should demand -- and you, as a so-called "professional" had a duty to demand that all of the data surrounding these jabs be released before they went into arms. You have a duty to insist that there be actual criminal penalties for failing to report adverse events into VAERS and even more-severe penalties for anyone tampering with, redacting or sitting on said reports including not autopsying persons who die shortly after using experimental treatments and publishing the findings, which the jabs all are.

You further have a duty to stop lying in your professional capacity and so does everyone else who claims a "professional" credential when it comes to medicine.  There are no approved jabs available to the public and the reason for it is obvious: Until and unless approval and recommendation comes for children marketing and selling the "approved" version is outside of both the PREP Act and NCVIA liability shields which means if Pfizer sells it and someone gets harmed they will get sued and lose.  Comirnaty is not available; I challenge you to find vials of it with lot numbers and produce them.  I have issued this challenge repeatedly since the alleged approval but not one such lot number and photograph of a vial has been shown in actual use.  The jabs that are available are all under EUA, they are and remain experimental to this day, the trials appear to have been gamed, the control group was deliberately destroyed making fair comparison impossible, some data from the trials was not reported at all including some that suggested a significant mortality increase, there is now a significant mortality increase in the working-age population that is not from Covid-19 and exactly correlates with the initiation of these jabs into that part of the population, the CDC's own data says that the most vaccinated cohort is still getting sick and winding up in the hospital WITH COVID in equal numbers to before any jabs were available and more.

But you have done none of this.

Indeed what you have done is the opposite and in fact you still claim that which the data and even the CDC disclaims: That the jabs prevent, on a material basis, acquisition and transmission of the virus.

I have no quarrel with anyone who reads your material, mine and everyone else's, does their own evaluation of all of it, weighing it as they see fit and comes to the opposite conclusion I did -- that for them in their opinion, the jab is a superior choice.  Were I in a different personal health situation I might well have come to that conclusion as well.

But there is no clear-cut, true for everyone answer in this regard especially when much of the data necessary to accurately calculate the odds either is being withheld on purpose from public disclosure and analysis, is being deliberately misrepresented or, perhaps worse, simply cannot be discerned without the passage of time that has not yet occurred.

I am not anti-vaccine.  I was forcibly inoculated with a whole host of things when I was young as are most children but on analysis as an adult I cannot disagree with the choices my parents made on my behalf.  Likewise, I made those decisions for my daughter when she was a child, and with one exception I agreed with the recommendations and she received those shots.  The one exception she had every capacity to change upon reaching her 18th birthday and I explained to her both my decision and that she was free to alter it at her discretion as an adult.  I have no idea what she decided because, since she is now an adult, her private health decisions are none of my damned business.  Likewise she decided (as a young adult) against the Covid-19 shots, got the disease (at the same time I did, which is why I know she had it), recovered without incident and now has natural immunity just as I have.

When it comes to the medical "industry" and "profession", especially that of so-called "public health" I do not trust it -- or you -- and never will in the future.  Your "profession" has destroyed its own credibility with your own hands and words.  Your "profession" has engaged in a two year long scream-fest of lies, you have failed to take reasonable mitigating actions for the most-vulnerable who we knew within weeks were at especially high risk, many of your cohorts deliberately exposed people in nursing homes to infected individuals, you have advocated for and used extraordinarily dangerous drugs which in addition to being dangerous have been proved in large trials to be worthless, you have continually advocated for "protective measures" that are physically impossible to be functional in actually reducing transmission and might increase it through physical transport of contaminated material from one place to another and you have repeatedly claimed, without evidence, that your preferred intervention is in fact a sterilizing inoculation and are completely, 100% of the time safe.  These were not errors -- these statements and acts were undertaken either with reckless disregard for the truth and known limitations of the data available or worse, with actual knowledge of falsity where there has been years or even (in the case of masks) decades of hard science proving you were full of crap.

Covid-19 is not the first load of garbage your so-called "profession" has run on the American population.  Roughly a million Americans a year die each and every year in whole or part as a result of the decades long pile of garbage your profession has and continues to run on what people should put down their piehole and is largely why obesity and diabetes continues to wildly expand in the United States and elsewhere.  Indeed that load of crap is likely responsible for a huge percentage of all Covid-19 deaths -- perhaps as many as half or even more!

There is no possible way for you to reclaim credibility with me.  You simply can't.  That which you or any other so-called "medical professional" assert from here onward must be backed by scientific evidence with all the data exposed, no redactions and no "trust me" assertions because you are not trust worthy.  Each and every piece of evidence that is missing I will construe against whatever you assert and that is perfectly reasonable, given the history of the last two years.

Period.

In a word: smiley

View this entry with comments (opens new window)