Is There Hope For The US?

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

For the entire lives of anyone under the age of seventy-five, the US has been at the top of the heap in almost every way. For decades, it had greater freedom, greater prosperity and higher production than any other country in the world.

America was a cornucopia – the centre for innovation and trends in technology, the arts and social development. And today, many Americans, even if they complain about changes for the worse in their country, come back quickly to say, “This is still the greatest country in the world.” Or, “Everybody is still trying to come here.”

Well, truth be told, neither of these knee-jerk comments is accurate any longer. But even those who have come to that realisation tend to resort to the inevitable fall-back comment: “Well, whattaya gonna do? It’s just as bad everyplace else.”

And yet, this is also inaccurate. Throughout the history of the world, whenever a country had entered its decline stage, others were in the process of rising up.

And this is just as true today. There are countries where prosperity and production are far greater than in the US and, increasingly, countries where the key ingredient that made America great – Liberty – is present to a far greater degree.

In fact, this is the one characteristic of America that’s most rapidly in decline. This is especially true in 2020, when a virus has been used as a justification to dramatically increase governmental dominance of the populace.

It matters little whether the US had a hand in creating the virus, or whether it was merely co-opted as an opportunity to expand control.

The result has been heavy-handed governmental meddling in medicine, business and personal freedoms.

As regards the latter concern, the odd halfway measure of personal movement control is not great enough to keep a virus from spreading, but it has been sufficient to collapse businesses, create record unemployment and make it impossible for some people to feed themselves.

In the bargain, it has served as an ideal cover story for an economic collapse that had been inevitable. The government can say, “Don’t blame us for the collapse; it was those naughty Chinese and their pesky virus that did it.”

The decline is not an accident. It’s a planned demolition. And it’s going well. For those who actually pull the strings, profit will be made from the unfolding crisis. Not for everyone, of course, but most certainly for those few who are creating it.

But many say that the US is waking up, that its citizenry are coming to the conclusion that the Deep State – that corporatist ruling class that are made up of governmental and big-business leaders – has increasingly destroyed the prosperity, production and liberty that once existed and replaced them with massive debt, an exit of production to other countries and a vanishing middle class.

And they’d be entirely correct. The endgame for the once-great US Empire is now underway, and over the next few years, we shall bear witness as it tumbles downhill.

So, what are Americans to do?

Well, my belief is that – as is always the case when a country declines – the populace will divide into several groups.

The first group, which will be by far the largest, will increasingly grumble, but ultimately do little or nothing to save themselves. They will go down with the ship.

The second group will say, “We don’t have to accept this.” They’re the preppers, the ones who have a store of food and have been stashing away guns and ammunition. They’re the folks who are seen at the corner bar, saying, “If they come for me, I’m locked and loaded.” Their friends nod in agreement, but in fact, if a trained and outfitted SWAT team were to arrive on their porch, there would be very few who would succeed in getting off a single shot, and for those who did, their remaining life would be brief.

On the more thoughtful side of this group would be the third group. They would also say, “We don’t have to accept this,” but their choice of a solution will be to “work within the system.”

This is a much larger group – the ones who wait for each election as though it holds a solution. Each time, they’re disappointed. If the party they supported is elected, the winners somehow fail to return the country to the free society it had once been. If the other party is elected, the decline only accelerates.

Incredibly, the lightbulb never seems to go on for this group. They never get to the point of realisation that, “Oh, I get it: neither party has any intention of returning the country to a state of liberty. The only question is which group of pretenders gets to be in charge of the decline this time around. Either way, I lose.”

It could be said that this is the most tragic group. They’re sincere and dedicated. They endlessly hope that a solution is just around the corner, without there being any actual substance for their hope.

The commonality in all three of these groups is that they all end up as casualties. They may differ in their approach to the decline, but they’ll share in the loss of their wealth (however large or small) and their liberty.

But there’s also a fourth group – those who leave. Their numbers are small and they tend not to make a large impact on the consciousness of the other three. In fact, they’re never even mentioned by the media. It’s as though they don’t exist.

So, let’s step back a few centuries. America was founded by a hardworking assortment of settlers who came from several countries in Europe. In their home countries they witnessed oppression – limitations to both their liberty and their ability to create a good life for themselves and their families.

They were independent-minded and self-reliant. They carved out lives in the wilderness and later built towns, then cities. But all the while, they hung on to their core belief of independence and liberty.

Today, they’re still revered as being the backbone of what made America great. And this view is accurate. Yet, today’s Americans are nothing like them. None of the three groups above thinks like them, although the middle group would like to believe they do, merely by owning guns. They’re not independent-minded. They’re not self-reliant.

The key here is that the founders of America recognised that there was no chance that they could change the corrupt and controlling systems they were born into in Europe.

So they left Europe and started over elsewhere.

The fourth group are following a similar path: Seek out a destination where the government does not yet have the power to rob you of your wealth and freedoms.

The choice is a simple one. If you value your liberty – the ability to make your own decisions and to keep more of what you’ve earned – pack your bags and go.

CDC RT-PCR Instruction Manual: NO 2019-nCoV Has Been Identified

CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel

“Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA.” 

The Average Age of COVID Deaths in England Is 82.4. The Average for All Other Deaths Is 81.5

by Terri-Ann Williams

Data analysed by experts at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) has revealed that the average age of deaths from the coronavirus is 82.4 years.

Analysis by the Oxford experts at the CEBM was compiled from data provided by the Office for Nation Statistics (ONS).

It shows that the average age of people dying in England and Wales from Covid-19 is 82.4.

This is slightly higher than deaths caused by other illnesses, which has a median age of 81.5.

This comes as it was revealed that 1.5 million cancer procedures were cancelled during the pandemic.

Data from NHS England also revealed yesterday that urgent cancer referrals are down 15 per cent due to the coronavirus “effect” – while NHS waiting lists reached record highs.

The study by the CEBM revealed that around 30,000 people who contracted the coronavirus were already dying from another illness and that just six people per thousand who catch it are likely to die from it.

Cancer has an average of 450 deaths a day, while deaths caused by dementia average at 214 deaths each day.

Heart disease has 174 and suicide has 18.

Looking at the age of patients who are dying, the experts said that around 40 per cent of people who have died from the virus are over the age of 85.

It also found that a further 33 per cent are between 75 and 84.

Local lockdowns are in place across the UK and include all age groups.

It was revealed earlier this week that more restrictions could be enforced in parts of the North and the Midlands in order to curb cases and to ease the burden on the NHS.

Professor Karol Sikora, head of Buckingham University medical school and the medical director of Rutherford Health said we “can’t afford” to worry about the NHS being overwhelmed.

He told the Daily Mail: “Instead we need to get people back to work and get rid of these ridiculous, unenforceable rules.

“They are ineffective and counter-productive, and are causing unimaginable harm.”

Looking at the age of people dying from other conditions, and the data also highlighted that barely one per cent of people dying from dementia are under the age of 44.

The average age of people dying from other causes is 81.5 years.

This reinforces the “Great Barrington Declaration”, which has so far been signed by over 15,000 experts in the medical profession.

‘Stay away from the elderly’

The declaration calls for the end to local restrictions and instead a focus on protecting those who are most at risk.

It also states that younger people “should be immediately allowed to get back to normal life”.

The data shows that those who are most at risk from the virus are the elderly.

Source: The Sun

The Specter of a Chinese Future

by Claudiu Secara

We pretty much see that the US-led Western economic system is crumbling under our own eyes. The industrial power-house of the West is completely out-done by the Chinese juggernaut. In every field of technological competition, the Chinese are out-competing the West with the exception of semiconductors. Not that the Chinese could not replicate or reverse engineer that last niche of technology, but it is restricted by the copyright monopoly held by the Western companies. For the Chinese to overtake that last piece of American advantage, it would have to invent a totally new technology, a totally parallel and a superior semiconductor industry. Based on past performance, that will only be a matter of time, in other words a few years.

Thus, the most frightening question is not whether the Western world can hold on to their own vs the Chinese, but what kind of role is going to be reserved for the West when it loses all its chips in the game.

Eastern Europe in the late 1960s and early 1970s offers a good vision of what can come to pass. After the devastating horrors of the two world wars and the separation from the other half of the continent, the Eastern European countries started to recover to “normal” by the late 1960s. Life in those years reached a peak of affluence. Incomes were steadily rising to the point where most families were enjoying substantial disposable income. A mini boom in apartment house construction, vacations abroad (even if mostly within the Eastern bloc), cars, household appliances were now common. It looked like another 10 years or so and they’d be catching up to Western Europe; it seemed all but guaranteed. And then something happened around 1972-73, and they never recovered again, ever since. Was it the first oil shock of 1973, was it the aftermath of the 1968 dissident movements, etc.? One example that seems to parallel the West of today was Romania’s choice of policy in those years.

At the time, Romania was enjoying an economic boom, consistently posting rates of growth of over 11 percent. But the ambitious young president, Nicolae Ceaușescu, had even more impressive plans. Shortly after Nixon’s trip to China and the opening of the new China policy by the Americans, Ceaușescu invited Nixon to Romania and at the same time followed his example and turned to China as a model for Romania itself. After a series of visits to China and North Korea, in April 1972 he issued the so-called “April Thesis,” through which Romania planned to introduce elements of the Chinese model in Romania, that is China’s work ethic, China’s cultural revolution, China’s manufacturing performance, and China’s opening to Western capital investment, and its perceived success. Romania became the first European country to experiment with the Chinese model.

Ceaușescu allowed Western investments to pour into Romania’s economy. From dozens and dozens of textile factories with Western money and Western technology working for Western markets to importing ambitions aviation technology, such as the mid-size British BAC commercial jet, to importing Canadian nuclear power plant technology at Cernavodă, etc., etc.

And just like what we are seeing today, the mini-cultural revolution followed closely behind. From a traditional joi de vivre, easy going, culture of restaurants and pubs with a vibrant nigh-life and partying, the new mini-culture revolution abruptly decreed a 9 PM curfew, a crackdown on work absenteeism, a crackdown on illicit income, a crackdown on assets that couldn’t be unaccounted for, in the name of an overall crackdown on the so-called everyday corruption. The result was that Romania turned into a grey, sullen, unhappy third-world labor pool for big Western capital. Even the public street lighting was reduced, first to fewer and lower lumens of fluorescence and then to total darkness. The whole country became a workshop serving Western capitalist financial interests.

It went like this for some 20 years, but by the time Romania repaid the loans to their Western Masters and would have reaped the benefits of their sacrifices and could have claimed a modern economy, like China does today, the West crushed it mercilessly and returned it to the feudal days.

So, how is that related to today’s world events? Is the China of today in the same situation as Romania around the 1980s? Will China become the enslaved coolie of Western capital again? Is Romania’s example a window into the future of China? And let’s not forget, was Ceaușescu’s fate in Piața Republicii what was and still is planned for the Chinese leaders in Tiananmen Square, as well?!

The answer is NO. What worked for Western Capital against a small, defenseless and opportunistic, hapless country, did not work against the formerly Number One World Civilization. Western capital broke its teeth trying to bite into that big piece of meat.

In an ironic twist, Romania’s example is an illustration of the future of the defeated Western world! It is an illustration of the fate awaiting the Western people. Hard to believe?!

What is the West’s magic weapon against the onslaught by the Chinese technological tide? A militarily Maginot line of defense? The Chinese will never invade the West militarily! A superior work ethic, now that night-life is under curfew on the pretext of fighting the Coronavirus throughout the Western world? Not really. Western man is an aging, soft, obese slob, hardly motivated to work his butt off day and night for the good of corporate profits. Western man is cynical at best and inept for the most part. He is uneducated and hooked up on watching TV, eating potato chips and drinking Coke, if not ingesting crack.

Where are the Western scientists and innovators? Graduates of what schools and universities?

For over one hundred years, the US soaked up the best and the brightest from Europe. All its major technological advancements were created by imported European-educated scientists at the turn of the twentieth century and then after each of the two devastating (to Europe) wars. A big, last hurrah occurred after the dismantling of the Warsaw Pact when scores of well-educated people from Eastern Europe crossed the Atlantic in fulfillment of their lost dreams of a better life. Today, most of the top graduates in America’s top STEM universities are Asians, if not simply Chinese. Any attempt to cut back their influence in the US will be a catalyst for going back to their native country, giving China an even greater edge over America’s moribund R&D efforts.

The future, indeed, does not look bright for the West. I predict that this time the tables will be turned, and the only future that I can see is one where the semi-employable, semi-literate people of the West will slowly but ineluctably slide into the fate that was reserved for the Chinese people. A cruel twist of history is happening under our eyes. We are witnessing not exactly the sacking of Byzantium by the Ottoman forces but the impoverishment of today’s Americans in their own formerly shiny country – just like what happened to the native Indians a few centuries before.

Will the US and Europe be able to avoid such a future? They can prolong the agony, sure. Or they can join the Chinese, becoming an appendage of it while losing all their millennial-long special culture of individual rights, sense of freedom and liberty.

Or they can save themselves by turning their countries into theme parks, making the most of their glorious past, their architecture, and culture. The West could become a series of open air museums, like many small towns such as Mougins in the French Riviera, where the locals are waiting on tables for the tourists from Asia. That’s one of their best choices. But wait, those are in Europe, not in the US. As for the US, it’s different, with no theme park of the past and with Whites a minority by 2050 – if the US doesn’t make the mistake of turning itself into a radioactive wasteland first.

On the other hand, I can see a White Europe kept together by the might of Russia’s military and Russia’s practically unlimited reserves of natural resources. But the US will remain in the memory like a Western movie of some frontier past.

By the same author, see also:

Test… Test… Test… — No, It’s About Collecting Your DNA!

Vaccines for the Useless Eaters

Why the Crash of the US is Mathematically Inevitable

Just When is the US Going to Collapse?

The Specter of a Chinese Future

Trump and the Failed (Bio)War against China

Is there a Strategy in the US’ BLM craze?

 

Visualizing The Relative Size Of Particles (Like COVID-19)

Lately, the world’s biggest threats have been microscopic in size.

From the global COVID-19 pandemic to wildfires ripping through the U.S. West Coast, it seems as though our lungs can’t catch a break, or more aptly, a breath.

But, as Visual Capitalist’s Carmen Ang asks, just how small are the particles we’re currently battling? And how does their size compare to other tiny molecules?

Specks Too Small to See

While the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 is relatively small in size, it isn’t the smallest virus particle out there.

Both the Zika virus and the T4 Bacteriophage – responsible for E. coli – are just a fraction of the size, although they have not nearly claimed as many lives as COVID-19 to date.

Coronavirus particles are smaller than both red or white blood cells, however, a single blood cell is still virtually invisible to the naked eye. For scale, we’ve also added in a single human hair as a benchmark on the upper end of the size range.

On the other end of the spectrum, pollen, salt, and sand are significantly larger than viruses or bacteria. Because of their higher relative sizes, our body is usually able to block them out—a particle needs to be smaller than 10 microns before it can be inhaled into your respiratory tract.

Because of this, pollen or sand typically get trapped in the nose and throat before they enter our lungs. The smaller particles particles, however, are able to slip through more easily.

Smoky Skies: Air Pollution and Wildfires

While the virus causing COVID-19 is certainly the most topical particle right now, it’s not the only speck that poses a health risk. Air pollution is one of the leading causes of death worldwide—it’s actually deadlier than smoking, malaria, or AIDS.

One major source of air pollution is particulate matter, which can contain dust, dirt, soot, and smoke particles. Averaging around 2.5 microns, these particles can often enter human lungs.

At just a fraction of the size between 0.4-0.7 microns, wildfire smoke poses even more of a health hazard. Research has also linked wildfire exposures to not just respiratory issues, but also cardiovascular and neurological issues.

Here’s an animated map by Flowing Data, showing how things heated up in peak wildfire season between August-September 2020:

What’s the main takeaway from all this?

There are many different kinds of specks that are smaller than the eye can see, and it’s worth knowing how they can impact human health.

Can Trump Base Crush the COVID Cult Bug-People?

byMarko Marjanović

I am so sick and tired of Donald Trump, but the other side is literally the COVID Rouge personified. He has been bad on COVID (remember March-April), as he has been bad on the Empire, but at least he is a dull, feckless, cowardly, narcissistic, evil little dilettante rather than the blob personified.

There are a number of people arguing that the MSM polls projecting a landslide win for Biden do not pass the eye test. Most voters when asked who they think will win answer Trump.

That might be the better outcome. There is an element of a hostage situation in the Democratic strategy where they threaten to continue dynamiting the country with riots and virus measures if they do not get their way on November 3rd, but there is no firm guarantee there would be a let up (particularly on the virus front) even if their demands were met.

To the contrary, they have been talking for months now how the homicidal shutdowns have been a godsend for “climate” and paternalistic technocracy.

Hope they are denied and we get to drink some COVID Rouge tears two weeks from now, but at the same time, we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking there is that much riding on the upcoming poll.

A big turnout of the anti-Dem base will simply mean that the etatist coastal liberals continue to control the media, the academia, and the bureaucracies, and have a pliant and clueless weenie in the White House, but at least they would not control it outright.

So instead of holding 100% of the power, they will hold 80%, but without any ownership of the outcome. It is a recipe for continued instability and dysfunction, but might be marginally better than the full-on virus Stalinism they promise if they get every last bit of the power.

Either way somebody awful is going to lose, and if you are an Iranian, a Venezuelan or a Palestinian you are probably rightfully rooting for it to be Trump. For everyone else, it’s probably better if it’s the camp that is still threatening to mandate muzzles, supposedly to counter a virus that isn’t countered by them and that has a survival rate in the ballpark of the common flu.

“I’m Not Here to Make Friends.” Scott Atlas Is the COVID Point Man We Could Have Only Wished For

by Philip Wegmann

It’s not just that the guy is mainly right, but that he has spirit and a fight uncommon in an egghead

Dr. Scott W. Atlas joined the president’s coronavirus task force in August, but after two months, he has yet to sit for a photo shoot or throw out a first pitch or inspire a single artisanal cocktail. No one has impersonated him on “Saturday Night Live” either, and there certainly isn’t any grassroots campaign to get him nominated as People magazine’s “Sexiest Man Alive.”

Although he has a medical degree from the University of Chicago, Atlas is the other doctor, and he knows it. “I’m not here to make friends. Okay?” he tells RealClearPolitics in a rare interview. “I’m here to help the president save American lives. Period.”

Every other member of the commission would say the same. Combating the coronavirus is the whole point, and saving lives through disease mitigation and prevention remains their goal. But Atlas, a neuro-radiologist and senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, has different ideas about how to beat COVID-19. He says publicly that children do not frequently spread the virus. He questions the efficacy of mask mandates. He condemns lockdowns as not just ineffective but deeply destructive.

In short, Atlas is a walking/talking ambassador for Trump’s the-cure-can’t-be-worse-than-the-disease argument. Those views and his proximity to an impressionable president, critics argue, make Atlas a public health threat. Hence, his unpopularity in some circles.

“Everything he says is false,” Dr. Robert Redfield said during a recently overheard phone conversation. Asked who he meant, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed to NBC News he was talking about Atlas. Later, during a CNN interview, Dr. Anthony Fauci said that most of his colleagues were “working together.” But the more visible and most adored member of the task force added, “I think you know who the outlier is.”

That outlier happens to have the ear of the president for now, and he does not appreciate the-less than-collegial criticism. “I think a lot of people honestly have other motivations,” Atlas responds, “whether they feel their own stature is threatened by someone who challenges their opinions with data, whether they are simply used to groupthink and not to informed people who have a critical thought process, or whether they are interested in maintaining their own media connections. That’s not me.”

Another thing Atlas is not: an epidemiologist or an expert in the study of infectious diseases. He finds that fact, whispered by critics and oft-repeated in the press, both annoying and “absurd.”

Lockdowns were the early prescription in the spring when comparatively little was known about the virus. At the recommendation of the task force in March, the White House and the president issued aggressive guidance to combat COVID: “15 Days to Slow the Spread.” Stay home, Trump encouraged the country, and avoid groups of more than 10 people.

“If everyone makes this change, or these critical changes, and sacrifices now, we will rally together as one nation and we will defeat the virus,” the president said in the White House briefing room. Two weeks later, he announced that 15 days of social distancing had to become 45 days. “The better you do,” Trump promised a second time, “the faster this whole nightmare will end.” It didn’t.

And that approach is what Atlas thinks is absurd. He believes that the recommended lockdowns constitute “one of the biggest failures of the faces of public health in this country.” The experts, he believes, adopted “a unidimensional view of the pandemic” and focused on “stopping COVID cases at all costs,” a decision that “recklessly disregarded the harms the prolonged lockdowns have on society and average Americans.”

Sustained lockdowns, he believes, harm those already sick with other illnesses by discouraging treatment, harm the poor by keeping them from the workplace, and harm the mental development of children by shutting down the schools. “The lockdown,” he has concluded, “is a luxury of the rich.”

A better strategy, says the populist doctor who has the ear of the populist president, would be to focus on protecting those most at-risk for the illness — the elderly and those with weakened immune systems — while the rest of society takes precautions but proceeds with their lives as researchers race to develop a vaccine.

As an illustration, Atlas points to colleges and universities. Although infections have spiked on some campuses, significant numbers of hospitalization and deaths among students have not followed. Young people are simply less susceptible to the virus’s worst impact. “I’m not minimizing anything,” Atlas says in reference to the handful of students hospitalized and the need to protect teachers, “but what I’m saying is that it is irrational to start seeking out cases in low-risk populations for people who are generally in low-risk environments. It is the exact opposite of logic and common sense.”

And while Atlas isn’t an epidemiologist, as his critics emphasize, he relies on the work of infectious disease experts the world over. He cites Sunetra Gupta, a professor of theoretical epidemiology at Oxford University who maintains that remaining in lockdown is “extremely dangerous from the point of view of the vulnerability of the entire population to new pathogens.” And he points to Katherine Yih, an epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School who argues that a broad public-health approach is needed “to minimize the number of cases of severe disease and death over the long run.”

Maybe Trump doesn’t read medical journals (he once suggested injecting disinfectants into the human body to fight the disease). But the president, Atlas insists, does listen to scientists: “We are learning, we are listening, and that is why we have a state-of-the-art understanding about the science that is consistent with the exact policy of the president,” he says, referring to Trump’s stated preference to implement strict protections for the vulnerable and a return to business for the rest of the society.

Atlas is getting good at making this argument. He’s made it on Fox News, and then after the president invited him to join the task force, he made it inside the administration. But then Trump got sick.

If the federal government, with all of its resources, can’t keep the president safe from the virus, how can the country be expected to protect the most vulnerable? That was the question RCP planned to put to Atlas the Friday that the COVID-positive president was admitted to Walter Reed medical center. But the interview was scuttled, and rescheduled for two days after Trump was discharged.

The first question put to him then: Doesn’t Trump’s own diagnosis upend Trump’s prescription of reopening society?

His response: “Not at all. If anything, the First Patient has solidified his pandemic thesis.

“The president’s case illustrates some very important things. Number One: The virus is not eliminated by mitigation; the virus is not eliminated by a lockdown.” All the handwashing and social distancing and mask wearing in his own inner circle were not enough to keep the president safe. Again, he adds, how it possible to protect the most vulnerable who aren’t nearly as insulated as the leader of the free world? Atlas points to the president a second time, noting the “very secure special environment in the White House,” where an audience with the president requires a negative COVID-test.

“But the virus is still there,” he concedes, and “none of these systems are infallible.” A second point the public should learn from the president’s case, according to Atlas: “This is not March or April. We’ve learned a tremendous amount about the virus — who is at risk, who is not; who to protect and who is at very low risk.”

Trump has now added his professed clean bill of health to his election platform, even though some of the drugs that apparently helped his recovery are unavailable to the public. Democrats, meanwhile, argue the opposite. The whole episode, in their view, illustrates a recklesssness that finally caught up with a president who mocks masks and flaunts CDC guidelines to host packed rallies amid a pandemic.

Isn’t Trump being careless? And isn’t he downplaying the virus by claiming a miraculous recovery? “He has a tremendous, I would say, respect for the seriousness of the disease,” Atlas responded, “but that does not mean that a leader can be afraid or can hide in the basement.”

Asked about the wisdom of holding a packed ceremony in the Rose Garden, where few attendees wore masks and which Fauci later described as a “super-spreader” event, Atlas insisted that Trump “wears a mask when he needs to and when he cannot socially distance.” Behavior that critics condemn as careless, Atlas calls the actions of someone who “knows that his job is essential.” And what Trump is saying with words and his subsequent return to the crowded campaign trail, he adds, “is to not be paralyzed by fear.”

Meanwhile, with less than three weeks to go until Election Day, Trump is a very active candidate. Cleared by his physicians, the president is campaigning at a frenzied pace, with stops planned in Pennsylvania and Iowa and North Carolina. If he feels any fatigue, he doesn’t show it. Trump told a Florida crowd on Monday night that he felt “so powerful,” claimed he was “immune,” and offered “to kiss everyone in that audience. I’ll kiss the guys and the beautiful women, and everybody. I’ll just give you a big, fat kiss.” He ended the night by dancing off stage to the “YMCA.”

Aside from the dancing president, Atlas is one of the most unpopular men in Washington. It probably doesn’t help that his bedside manor isn’t the warmest or that he is quick to criticize those who helmed the initial response to the virus and “instilled fear into the American public.”

“There’s been obsession after obsession after obsession in this pandemic about testing-testing-testing about cases-cases-cases about masks-masks-masks. That’s not the issue,” Atlas argued. “His policy is completely appropriate, and it is 100% backed by the science.”

What’s especially not scientific? According to Atlas, the obsession with masks and the congressional testimony of his task force colleague: “The CDC has many fine scientists, I am sure of that, but when the head of the CDC held up a mask and said a mask is better than a vaccine, that is absurd. That is not science. That is contrary to all rational thought.”

Mask mandates and those who propose them, he says, “are completely contrary to rational thought.” There is a time and place for the mask, namely when you can’t social distance. But Atlas is clearly frustrated by their universal use: “Why in the world would you wear a mask if you’re riding your bicycle all alone outside? Why in the world would you wear a mask if you’re in your own car driving? Why in the world would you wear a mask if you’re in the desert all alone?”

That the vaccine is forthcoming is significant reason “for optimism.” Atlas says a successful vaccine could be approved as early as this month. If deemed effective by the FDA, doses would go first to “priority groups and people at high risk no later than January.” He plans to eventually take it himself, and hopes the hypodermic needle will be the knife in the heart of the virus.

Some wonder whether politics plays an undue role in the Operation Warp Speed effort. Vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris has even questioned its effectiveness, saying that “if Donald Trump tells us what we should take it, I’m not going to take it.”

Unprompted, Atlas dismisses as a conspiracy theory any suggestion that the president, not the doctors, are driving development. He calls any assertion to the contrary “heinous,” an outright “sin.” He won’t attack any politician by name because “it’s not my job.” All the same and in no uncertain terms, the doctor condemns “anyone who is in a position of leadership who instills doubt and fear into the process of the vaccine.” They are guilty, he says, of “doing more harm than I could ever imagined a public figure would do.”

Whenever a vaccine becomes available, Atlas says getting it won’t be mandatory. Meanwhile, masks remain readily available. Should the president set a better example by wearing one more regularly? “He believes in freedom,” Atlas responds, “and he believes in individual responsibility, but he is doing his job to do the right recommendations.”

Medical historians will judge if Trump did enough to combat the pandemic. His critics have already concluded that he has not, and it is part of the reason Joe Biden holds a double-digit lead against him. But even if the president doesn’t win a second term, Atlas may enjoy some eventual vindication.

“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” Dr. David Nabarro, one of six special envoys to the WHO on COVID-19, said in an Oct. 9 interview. Lockdowns, he added, only “buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

The statement followed a proclamation written by three epidemiologists and infectious-disease experts, Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Dr. Gupta of Oxford and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford. Called “the Great Barrington Declaration,” it warns that letting lockdowns linger until a vaccine is developed “will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.”

Days after his RCP interview, Atlas wrote to this reporter: “I hope you explicitly point out that my advisement and writings since March have now been publicly stated in that document by some of the world’s top infectious disease scientists and epidemiologists, and they are aligned with the President’s policies.”

To date, 9,366 medical and public health scientists have signed the letter along with another 24,484 medical practitioners.

Source: Real Clear Politics

Frightening Chinese Maniacal Total Control in Their Own Words – They are a Menace!

The article below appeared in Global Times, the voice of the Chinese government. It clearly spells out:

  • the falsehood regarding Covid-19 testing as a measure of infection by a non-virus,
  • the promotion of falsehoods regarding the so-called “case” numbers based on a false “positive” as a criterion for raising the alarm, and fear mongering aimed at Western populations,
  • the purposeful omission of the real numbers of deaths by the coronavirus as the only true measure of a pandemic,
  • the misleading advice promoting further lockdowns in the Western world,the jubilation at the Western economic self destruction,
  • the promotion of the totalitarian and inhuman, ants-like, Chinese model to be imposed on Western societies,
  • the arrogance of the Chinese new Masters of the World.

This should be a wake-up call to any man and woman as to the future, the new world. This is what Bill Gates, the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the CDC, the GAVI organization, the Biden/Harris administration have in store for the American people.

Read it for yourself:

————————————————————————

By GT staff reporters Source: Global Times

a475705d-514f-43f4-bf2c-5f1b64ffd5ce.jpeg

People wearing face masks walk on Via dei Fori Imperiali in Rome, Italy, Oct 6, 2020. Five southern regions of Italy have introduced mandatory mask laws, even for people in open spaces. And the government has announced that the national state of emergency, first put into place on Jan. 31, would be extended “at least” until its one-year anniversary.Photo:Xinhua

Europe’s failure to balance the need to restart the economy and protect the public health as well as the public’s decreasing vigilance against the virus may have contributed to a serious second wave of the COVID-19 in the continent, Chinese nationals and health experts said on Friday.

The 27 countries of the European Union and the UK have now surpassed the US in terms of new cases per million for the first time since spring. In Italy, the number of new confirmed cases in a single day has been hitting record highs in recent days, and the number of deaths in the past week has increased by nearly 40 percent.

5285890808751730576.png

The Chinese Embassy in Italy on Friday urged Chinese nationals to remain vigilant against what it calls a more serious second wave of COVID-19 in the country, as nearly 100 Chinese nationals have been infected with the coronavirus so far in several clusters.

Among those already infected, some are severely ill, the embassy said in an alert notice, saying the Chinese community has been impacted by the second wave of the epidemic far worse than the first one. The embassy added that there have been some clusters of infections in Chinese communities, which are believed to be related to gatherings brought about by the resumption of work and production.

The cluster infection in the Chinese community mainly happened in Prato, where many factories are run by Chinese. Some Chinese parents in Prato have decided not to send their children to school to avoid infection, and employees have returned to working from home, Blanche Wang, a 33-year-old Chinese living in Milan, told the Global Times on Friday.

Some Chinese in Italy reached by the Global Times have been seeking ways to return to China, while others like Wang plan to stay in Italy due to the risk of being infected on a plane.

People’s decreasing vigilance against the virus, the large-scale cross-border traveling during the summer vacation, as well as the lax epidemic control measures may have led the second wave to hit Europe rapidly and hard, some Chinese residents living Italy told the Global Times.

“In August, when Europe was in a holiday season, a large number of tourists from the UK and Germany visited Italy. The beaches were more crowded than ever, and people were not protecting themselves well,” Wang said.

This was echoed by Chen Ming in Turin, co-founder and head of the China-Italy Youth Association (ANGI), who told the Global Times that young people are the most negligent.

The large-scale protests in some European countries have also created a breeding ground for the coronavirus, Wang said. “People in some countries are not taking the pandemic as seriously as Chinese.”

Wang thinks that epidemic control measures in some European countries are far too loose.

In Italy, quarantine of asymptomatic cases are mostly carried out at home, instead of in a designated place as China does, and patients are released once the quarantine period is over even if they still tested positive for the virus.

Yang Zhanqiu, deputy director of the pathogen biology department at Wuhan University, told the Global Times that the pandemic in Europe has never been fully controlled. With winter approaching, Europe is likely to witness a fresh wave of coronavirus.

Yang also pointed out that the rather loose control measures in European countries for the sake of economic recovery also worsened the pandemic situation.

He predicted that the new wave in winter may not be stronger than the pandemic in spring, as local people have developed immunities, but still could result in severe situations in some parts of the continent.

Is there a Strategy in the US’ BLM craze?

Claudiu Secara

September 15, 2020

For many years I’ve been telling my friends how I explain the last 40 years of living history, and why I didn’t feel compelled to have it all written down in an essay. It seemed counterproductive. As the sayings goes: “Those who know don’t talk, and those who talk don’t know.” In other words, the real story of the last 40 years is so different from the one that people are made to think it was/is, that it is hopeless to try to debunk their perception. Nobody would believe you anyway. At least, among those who talk but do not know. On the other hand, what is the point of trying to explain, in a very speculative way, something to those who know it in detail, but don’t talk? Besides, how to prove it? A few major watershed events would need to be entirely reprogrammed even in the mind of a few skeptics of the official story.

Now, here is what I think.

Every reference these days has a few landmarks that are set out as conventional truths: “the collapse of the Soviet Union,” “the spread of the capitalist/democratic system,” “the 9/11 terrorist attack,” “the covid-19 pandemic,” etc.

There are at least 3 major schools of opinion vis-à-vis these events: Those who believe that everything is fine, just a hiccup, and everything will be OK, don’t worry. The clever ones who think that the Western Plutocrats are staging a world takeover through cyber surveillance, bio and police control, trans-humanism, etc. Let’s not forget the anti-white (in general), or anti-white supremacy, Jewish pro-BLM conspiracy, etc.

Others think that the West is definitely in a final stage of defeat in its confrontation with the emerging powers of the East, China and Russia and it is preparing for the day after.

This is the strategy for the day when the Western hegemony is past history, when the Chinese are in charge of the world and white supremacy is a footnote of history. From colonial power to neocolonial power to the position of joining the rest of the world colonies… America is now fighting a revolutionary, liberation war against the new “colonial” China. America is now the leader of Black Africa, of the Brown Latinos and the Brown Muslim world. The slogan “Black Lives Matter” can now be understood to imply that “Yellow Lives Don’t Matter.”

The fake pandemic offers the opportunity to stop the unwinnable economic race with China, while the Black Lives Matter movement changes the position of the country from the unipolar hegemon to the champion of the “oppressed peoples of the world.”

The US is running out of both energy resources and human resources, while accumulating debt of colossal proportions. The windfall from fracking is over — and not because of the low prices for oil and gas, but because the Permian and Bakken are 85% depleted, with nothing to replace them. In 2008, when Obama began his presidency, the federal debt was $8 Trillion; by the end of his presidency in 2016, it was up to $18 Trillion. Last year, it went to $22, and by the end of this year it is expected to be somewhere near $30 Trillion. And all of this while the real GDP is nowhere close to the official numbers. In 2010, a study by the Chinese Dagong Global Credit Rating Co., Ltd. showed that:

In 2010, China’s main credit rating agency Dagong argued for the first time that the U.S. economy was actually much closer to $5 trillion rather than $15 trillion” […] It is predicted that the average real GDP per year of the United States will not reach 6 trillion U.S. dollar and per capita GDP will be less than 20,000 in the coming 3-5 years.

How did we get here?

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the all-powerful US took a beating from the Soviet Union/Russia, by falling for the charade that the Soviet Union lost the Cold War. No, the Soviet Union could not have lost the war at the very height of its military power. It was already matching, or even outclassing, the US in virtually all military weapons categories by the end of the 1970s.

But the most severe blow was applied by the poor Communist Chinese, who were viewed, even by foreign policy experts, as some lower equivalent of the overcrowded Indians or the Bangladeshi. They could not possibly beat us at our own industrial/electronic game. They were just hungry little ants, not capable of strategic thinking.

At this stage, faced with imminent disintegration, the US is split between two options: circle the wagons and prepare for an all-out war against the newly emerging powers, or finally, after 20 or more agonizing years, change tack. The singular Trump and his sidekick Pompeo are dreaming of bygone times when MAGA may have been an option. He and his nostalgic “deplorables” see only the precipice facing the nation and envision a heroic fight to the last man. This is the phase a formerly great country resorts to when only a clown can pretend to be the new restorative statesman and distract the public. The rest of the political class is using the clown as the scapegoat while preparing a strategic realignment.

Let’s look back a few decades. I wrote in The New Commonwealth, in the 1990s:

“For anyone who has followed closely the events in Eastern Europe for the past thirty years, the systematic absence of one possible scenario from the mainstream media dialog is baffling — namely that today’s Russian troubles may be only a shield behind which a more powerful regeneration is in progress. The New York Times Magazine, August 10 1997, brings up one of many questions to which modern history awaits a convincing answer. On the occasion of former Defense Secretary McNamara’s revisiting Vietnam, it reminds us of one such unelucidated inconsistency: “If the reason [for the war in Vietnam] was to fight communism, why did the U.S. not help [imperial] China in 1949, or why did the U.S. not help the Batista regime in Cuba in 1959?” There are indeed significant and puzzling inconsistencies in the story of the Soviet Union’s “collapse.”

Consider the artfulness, bordering on the Machiavellian, and the lengthy effort that went into its demise and one has sufficient grounds for a different tale. The process of “collapse,” basically from 1983 on, came about as the country’s establishment applied blow after blow to the highly coherent and resilient Soviet system. The most intriguing aspect of this incredible series of events is that behind it was the political will of the elite — the Soviet elite who had decided that the Soviet system must be dismembered, while the so-called disgruntled masses played a minor role. That amounts, but only on a superficial look, to the impression that the elite itself might have voluntarily decided to dismantle and demobilize its own lines of defense and submit to a condition of servitude to its adversary.

From socialism to capitalism and back to a superior form of socialism is how the old Marxist dialecticians would phrase it. By compromising both models — the old communist orthodoxy as well as the newer aspirant, casino capitalism — the power establishment makes it possible to bring the country safely back to socialist capitalism.

The centuries long Russian-Anglo-American love-hate relationship has been evolving dramatically from late 1978 until today, that is clear. However, one might notice that it is being redesigned in such a way as to accommodate in the long run a more assertive, more successful and more powerful Russia overlording its European and southern peripheries.

It might be useful it to remind ourselves of the true balance in nuclear warheads between the two superpowers:

In fact, compared with the 17,000 warheads in the U.S. arsenal at the time, the Soviet arsenal crested in 1986 at 45,000 warheads, a number that gives a better sense of the Soviet war machine’s outstanding performance. Amazingly enough, the actual Soviet stockpile nearly matched the Western estimate at that time of a total of 50,000 nuclear warheads for the US, Russia, France, Great Britain, China and Israel combined.

In despair, in 1970s the Amerikanski turned to China in a vain attempt to meet the demand for both guns and butter, on a large scale, as pursued since the 1960s — plus to scare the hell out of the Russians by this new alliance. We know the net result of that. By 2010, China overtook the US in terms of GDP on the basis of PPP, see Global Research outmatching the US in just about every technological and scientific field, though less so in the semiconductors field where the race is still on for a few more years.

So, when did the US actually lose the race to the new aspirants? In the year 2020, due to high debt and technological un-competitiveness? Maybe earlier, in 2008, with the sub-prime bubble? Or maybe on 9/11/2001, when it was supposedly “attacked” on its own territory? Maybe earlier still, in 1973, when the dollar was converted into fiat money, coupled with the loss of the Vietnam War? Or a decade earlier, with the John F. Kennedy assassination and the ensuing race riots? Or was the loss of the Korean War the moment?

Technically speaking, the US had already lost the race in the 1930s, only to be saved, briefly, by the engineering of World War II. The US extended its survival precisely at the expense of all the other capitalist countries and the colonization of half the world. The communists were right in that the West/US was already entering the terminal phase of its demise as Lenin predicted in the early years of the 20th century. And so were predicting many outstanding intellectuals at the time, most famous among them being  Oswald Spengler in his two-volume The Downfall of the Occident. Convolution after convolution increased the spiral of debt, more military adventures, more dumbing down of its population, more selling of the “family patrimony,” that is, the nation’s industry, to its very adversaries for one more day’s lunch, more self-indulgence, indolence, drugs and promiscuity and the destruction of its golden asset — its human capital.

So why then the so-called “collapse of the Soviet Union”? Why didn’t the Soviet leaders choose the Chinese model and maintain its evolutionary course rather than the break up? First, let us bear in mind the two most critical and immediate challenges that the Bolshevik Revolution had had to face in 1918: the nationalities problem and the need for agrarian reform. Imperial Russia, as opposed to China, was a multi-ethnic conglomerate of historical distinct nations and any relaxing of the authoritarian system would have had the rapid consequence of the disintegration of the Russia empire. China has an overwhelming Han population (92%) with small ethnic minorities. The Muslims in Xinjiang, highly exploited by the West propaganda, are only 0.87%, Tibetans are 0.47%. They are incapable of destabilizing the foundations of the Chinese state.

The second urgent demand was the peasant pressure for agrarian reform, which was counter to national need for large scale agricultural development that could support the interests of Russia’s need for industrialization and national economic development.

An authoritarian state was necessary to keep these two centrifugal forces in check so that the Soviet Union for 100 years avoided the breakup of the Russian state into smaller and smaller statelets. Only by the time the Soviet Union was secure militarily, and was competitive economically, with a very strong domestic scientific elite and with an educated labor force at its core, was it finally capable of withstanding those centrifugal forces without the use of heavy-handed coercive authority.

That’s when the “collapse of the Soviet Union” was in fact possible as a way to end the war economy and re-integrate into the world economy as a sovereign nation.

A key article in Red Star in 1984, written by Marshal Nikolai Vasilyevich Ogarkov, Chief of the General Staff of the USSR, between 1977 and 1984, goes into even greater detail on the matter of the major changes taking place within the sacrosanct world of nuclear weapons. According to Ogarkov, three major changes had occurred in recent years in military affairs. The first was the decreasing value of nuclear weapons as a result of their quantitative proliferation. The second was the increasing importance of conventional high-technology weapons systems. The third major change, he argued, was “the rapid development of science and technology in recent years [that] creates real preconditions for the emergence in the very near future of even more destructive and previously unknown types of weapons based on new physical principles.” Work on such weapons, Ogarkov warned, was already under way; and, he went on, it would be a serious mistake not to consider their implications “right now.”

In 2020, those prophetic words revealed what he meant when Gerbert Yefremov, a renowned engineer who played a key role in designing Russia’s newest missile systems, including the Avangard glide vehicle, told Rossiyskaya Gazeta:Our experiments with these types of things began in the Soviet times, when Obama was still a teenager… He was still a schoolboy when we were already experimenting with hypersonic tech,” said the 87-year-old designer.

And in Putin’s words:

The country had been playing catch up with the US since the Cold War in terms of military technology, but “now they are chasing after us, trying to catch up”.

So, where are we now? The US is confronting a number of catastrophic economic challenges that it cannot overcome. Since these problems have no solutions, the country can only continue to operate by borrowing money and printing money for a short period.

  • · In order to cover the shortfall in domestic energy resources, the US has attempted wars of conquest in the Middle East, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Libya, Syria, etc., but the walls of defenses supported by Russia and China set a red line that the US could not cross. It didn’t work.
  • · In order to fight back, the US undertook a desperate direct attempt to disrupt their economic livelihood by threatening both of the two powers through sanctions and bad press. It didn’t work.
  • · In order to divide and weaken the two rivals, it also attempted to drive a wedge between them, first attempting to woo China, then switching to wooing Russia, by hook and by crook. It didn’t work.
  • · Finally, in order to damage the world economy dominated by China, the US set out to crash the whole world economy through trade tariffs. But this backfired, damaging its own economy most. So far, it hasn’t worked.
  • · In a desperate attempt to collect rents and dividends from around the world, it created a scamdemic to promote a new GloboCop vaccine industry; with a collateral attempt to pin the blame on China, in hopes of collecting “reparations” from, for the “Wuhan Flu.” So far, it doesn’t seem to be working.
  • · In order to buttress its flagging corporate profits, it attempted to steal more of the mature, successful companies from around the world, with the latest targets being China’s Huawei and TikTok. So far, it doesn’t seem to be working.

Unfortunately the naked truth remains that the US casino & gangster economy has reached the end of its natural life.

The US superpower status is only an illusion. The US is in fact a third-world country with nukes. The US has demoted itself to the ranks of the impoverished world’s South and it is now also joining the front of Black Africa.

Yes, the upcoming Brown and Black “New America” is looking for a new persona, anti-White, pro people of color. Hence the new movement of BLM. The new continent has exhausted itself while the old and resilient civilizations of Asia and Europe are reclaiming their historical status.

By the same author, see also:

Test… Test… Test… — No, It’s About Collecting Your DNA!

Vaccines for the Useless Eaters

Why the Crash of the US is Mathematically Inevitable

Just When is the US Going to Collapse?

The Specter of a Chinese Future

Trump and the Failed (Bio)War against China

Is there a Strategy in the US’ BLM craze?