Reaction
to the News of Late February 2022:
The Death of Jean-Luc Brunel, the End of Covid Mandates,
and the Russo-Ukrainian War (Part 1 of 2)
Table of Contents
First Introduction: Message to My Readers
Second Introduction: Worse Comes to Worse (Covid-19 and Ukraine)
Part I: The First Rule of Coronavirus is That You Don’t Talk About Coronavirus
Part II: Stop Suffocating Your Kid, and Stop Being Obsessed with Other People’s
Bodies
[see the next post to read the remaining sections of this article:]
Part III: What American Sex Scandals Have to Do with Ukraine
Part IV: Jean-Luc Brunel
Part V: The Russo-Ukrainian War
Part VI: Conclusions
Content
First Introduction: Message to My Readers
I apologize to my readers
for going nearly three months without publishing any new articles. Make no
mistake; The Aquarian Agrarian is not going anywhere.
But recent circumstances in my
personal life have made it necessary for me to place several goals ahead of
writing about ongoing matters in politics, namely:
1) struggling to decrease my
current level of socializing to a level that’s acceptable and allows me to
write more;
2) re-arranging and cleaning
my apartment;
3) organizing plans related to
my non-political hobbies;
4) making plans to complete
old and unfinished writing; and
5) re-arranging the order in
which I will complete the articles and chapters which I will need to write, in
order to complete my upcoming book Rapists Defending Rapists.
That book will be about the
child abuse which I endured at the hands of my father, and my ongoing attempts
to get criminal charges filed against him for those crimes.
You can read more about that –
and child abuse in Lake County, Illinois – by visiting the links at the
following page:
That book should,
hopefully, come out before the end of 2022.
I am also planning to launch a
new website, JoeKopsick.com, which is currently under construction. That site
can be viewed at http://www.joekopsick.com.
Additionally, I am planning to
transfer the nearly 200 articles on my blog which deal with government sex
scandals, onto a new blog called PizzaFake or PizzaFact?. That blog
(empty as of February 2022) can be seen at http://pizzafakeorpizzafact.blogspot.com.
I have also launched a new
YouTube channel since my old one was taken down. That channel can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_sq2Ku0ZpWiGeQetFGa_wg.
You can expect more videos to
be uploaded to that channel soon. The channel will be up, unless and until my
video commentaries (regarding the coronavirus pandemic, government sex scandals,
and/or communism) get flagged as too controversial to remain on YouTube.
I am exploring alternative
modes of video storage, to prevent problems like this from occurring in the
future.
Given that my blog contains
twenty incomplete articles, and about forty articles which need small amounts
of editing and expansion, it will be impossible for me – for the remainder of this year - to
weigh-in on current events as often, and in as much detail, as I would like to.
But I am writing this article
– beginning on February 25th, 2022, the day after my thirty-fifth
birthday – in order to, at least, provide my readers with something.
What follows is a reflection
upon the news of late February 2022; focusing on the Russo-Ukrainian War, the
death of Jean-Luc Brunel, and their relationship to Jeffrey Epstein, other
government sex scandals, and the end of many government mandates related to the
Coronavirus pandemic.
Second Introduction: Worse Comes to Worse (Covid-19 and Ukraine)
Many Americans still believe
that “World War II helped get America out of the Great Depression”.
It could be argued that that
is true. And those who believe that the government should increase military
spending in order to promote economic growth, are called Military Keynesians.
But if it’s true that “World
War II helped get us out of the Depression”, then it’s only true because,
during the war, what Eisenhower later called the “Military-Industrial Complex” (essentially,
war profiteers) took control of the economy, and of large amounts of money, by
becoming employers of large numbers of people (women included).
It becomes a lot easier to
organize economy once everyone has the same goal (namely, blowing-up the
enemy). In 1947, the grip which war profiteers held on the nation’s post-wartime
economy, made it possible to orchestrate a large re-organization of the
president’s security powers, without much public awareness or objection.
This re-organization caused
the executive branch – and the American national intelligence sector (which
made use of many of the same computer technologies which I.B.M. supplied to the
Nazis) - to grow to totalitarian proportions.
The government prints and
taxes huge amounts of money – much more than it needs – in order to be able to
finance wars. And then – especially during wartime - the government’s monopoly
powers (assisted by the citizens’ ignorance about how to maintain the
limitations on their government) allow the government to nationalize whole
industries and sectors of the economy.
Control over these industries
is handed-over to the president as executive, gradually more and more, as
Congress and the formerly free business sector hand-over more of their wealth
and property to the national government. Thus, the president benefits from the
growth of the government’s monopoly powers, and, indeed, the unitary executive
is the chief beneficiary of the growth of the government’s powers.
As government’s control over
the economy grows, the government’s political monopoly leads to a “regulatory
capture” of business; that is, the businesses come to be “regulated” by
lawmakers who recently worked for or invested in the same businesses (or who
still do).
The government assists
businesses to become monopolies, by picking winners and losers; not only in the
arms industry, but in other industries as well. This occurs through
subsidization, and the protection of the property claims of wealthy companies
and individuals (who are often corrupt and do not deserve to have most of their
property claims enforced).
And, in authoritarian regimes,
government officials invade businesses in order to hassle them with
threatening, intimidating inspections, subtle demands of money in exchange for
leaving the owners alone, and even theft from businesses by officers.
When government’s “regulation”
of businesses involves subsidies, property protection, and taxes – and doesn’t
involve threats of harm – the subsidies and protection usually serve as
consolation, to the business owners, for the fact that they are being taxed.
But overregulation, overtaxation, and government protecting too many unpopular
property claims, can all lead to the kind of civil unrest which can result in
revolution (and even war).
But the promise that
businesses will be taxed and regulated, causes the people and the workers to be
complacent with the welfare state, instead of something more long-lasting and
permanent, which would be their own (such as property, guaranteed economic
freedom, a jobs guarantee, or some variety of a collectivistic economy, or any
kind of economic system that actually produced something instead of acquiring
value through destruction, environmental devastation, and wartime plundering).
And satisfaction with the
state of affairs of business is what causes the people to become placated
enough with their material well-being, that they are not willing to criticize
the expenditure of their tax money on killing people overseas.
Thus, If World War II helped
get America out of the Depression, then it’s because wartime made it necessary
to ramp up production and militarize the economy.
And also, because World War II
was a problem that was large enough to force Americans (and the rest of the
world) to re-orient their priorities towards the future, in the wake and
aftermath of the Depression. The war re-oriented Americans’ thought process
from “How are we going to endure this depression?” to “How are we going to get
out of this depression?”.
Memes not created by the author of this blog.
It is in much the same way
that World War II “helped us get out of the depression”, that the now-erupting
Russo-Ukrainian War (which, many are concerned, could escalate into World War III) is “helping us get out of the coronavirus pandemic”.
My hope is that it will force
us to re-focus our priorities towards how to create a peaceful and stable
future for our planet, without creating unreasonable travel and work conditions
for people who are being treated like criminals just because they got sick (or
might get sick).
I say that, of course, not
because the war in Ukraine is helping to cure anyone of Covid-19, but
because what’s going on there is not directly related to Coronavirus. And we
need something – anything – to talk about, besides Covid-19, because we
have been obsessed with it for the last two years.
And not just to the point where
the droning voices of media have echoed on about the many different facets of
the story for months and months. But also to the point where we’ve ignored
other very important stories, like what China has been doing to the Uyghur
Muslims, the time war almost erupted between India and China over mining
rights, the looming possibility of war between China and Taiwan.
Sure; talking about the
possibility of China going to war (with Taiwan, America, India, or whomever)
may be a non-starter. That’s because – while it does serve to change the
subject away from Covid – most of the people who want to talk about a
China-Taiwan war, probably want to start such a war.
But other news stories which
we could be discussing include what’s in Hunter Biden’s laptop, the ongoing
torture of Julian Assange, and the ongoing conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Somalia,
and Israel-Palestine.
Numerous critics of U.S. foreign policy have noted in
recent days that, if the neo-liberal American media had responded to any of
these wars with anywhere near such visceral outrage as has been outpoured over
Russia's attack on Ukraine, then these wars would have ended a long time ago.
But most importantly – for the
purposes of this article – we have been ignoring the deaths of Jeffrey Epstein
and Jean-Luc Brunel, and the guilty verdict in the case of Ghislaine Maxwell.
Some people my age have posted
on social media recently that we should be talking about the trucker protest in
Canada (which is coming to the U.S. soon, beginning in California) instead of
worrying about Ukraine.
But there are two problems
with that: 1) talking about the truckers doesn’t help us stop talking about
coronavirus; and 2) people were saying that before reports emerged that the
Russian military had taken out 83 above-ground Ukrainian military bases,
annihilated the country’s air defenses, and bombed the capital of Kiev and numerous other cities.
And so – at least for now –
I’m going to focus on the looming possibility of escalation in the
Russo-Ukrainian conflict over the Donbas region, and what it has to do with
Coronavirus, Jeffrey Epstein and his associates, and sex scandals which involve
the U.S. and Russia and/or Ukraine.
Part I: The First Rule of Coronavirus is That You Don’t Talk About Coronavirus
If we all stop talking about
Covid-19, it will go away.
Of course, I don’t mean that
literally.
When I say “it will go
away”, by “it”, I mean the authoritarianism. The mandates. The unreasonable
restrictions on our work and travel and immigration, which are being enforced
in the name of science.
But it might actually be true
in a literal sense as well.
What I’m saying is that we
should do what the government of the Netherlands has been saying we should do
since the pandemic began: We should learn to live with the virus.
I say that because (as
podcaster and comedian Jimmy Dore has been saying) everyone is going to get the
virus. N.I.A.I.D. Director Anthony Fauci, and former Medicare administrator
Andy Slavitt have admitted that. And Rochelle Walensky, director of the C.D.C.
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) admitted in January that
coronavirus vaccines are no longer effective at preventing transmissions.
And I’m saying that if large
numbers of people stop communicating a demand for coronavirus-related
products and coronavirus-related news coverage, then the Big Pharma -controlled
mainstream news media will stop pitching more government controls, more vaccine
mandates, and more health insurance mandates (which will inevitably result in
higher medical prices, despite what politicians claim) as the solutions.
And the sooner that happens,
the sooner people will begin to consider taking generic medications, and
demanding the right to buy themselves more medications without prescriptions as
long as they are informed of the ingredients and potential risks. And the
sooner they will begin to pay attention to their own dietary and exercise and
rest habits, and admit to themselves that the government could not
realistically take care of all of us even if it wanted to.
The sooner all of this
happens, the sooner we will realize what Dutch medical scientists have been
telling us from the start of this pandemic; that natural immunity can help us,
as long as we do not all get exposed to the virus at once, because that would
cause hospitals to be overwhelmed with patients.
Coronavirus is essentially
just a new variant of S.A.R.S. (which is why it’s called SARS-CoV-2). It has
symptoms so similar to the flu and pneumonia, that avoiding it forever will be
practically impossible, and distinguishing a Covid-related death from a
Covid-caused death will be just as difficult (and the confusion about
these numbers will be used to confuse and scare us).
Now, doctors are increasingly
saying that exposure to the latest strain of the Covid-19 virus – the mild
Omicron variant – can confer a type of natural immunity which is safer than
vaccines (or, at least, safer than getting vaccines and multiple booster
shots). But then, of course, it only confers natural immunity when it does not
result in the death of the patient.
If you have lungs, getting
respiratory diseases is just a part of life.
Of course, these diseases is a
part of death, too, which is a problem. The problem, in fact.
But the government should not
compound that problem by merely hinting that taking Vitamin C could help
you recover from an immune illness. Our government will recommend taking
vitamins, but it will not explain why, and it will not remind us that Vitamins
C, D, E, and Zinc are all helpful. Jimmy Dore has mentioned D3 and K2 as
helpful as well.
In fact, there is a medical
trial that's going on right now, which will not be complete for another two
years, regarding what's called “Quintuple Therapy”. This involves treatment
with Vitamin C, Vitamin D, Zinc, hydroxychloroquine sulfate, and Azithromycin
(Z-Pak). I predict that these trials will find this combination of drugs more
effective against coronavirus than not. If that happens, then it will likely
vindicate those who recommended the use of hydroxychloroquine sulfate (distinct
from the fish tank cleaner hydroxychloroquine) early-on in the pandemic.
That the government and the
mainstream media have completely failed to bring these trials to Americans’
attention, is an act of medical negligence that ought to be criminal.
Additionally, the government
couldn’t keep it straight, early on, whether we needed “social distancing” or
“physical distancing”, or both. Government made little effort to distinguish
staying apart from people physically, from ceasing communication with others.
And so – due to that lack of
clarity - people who shouldn’t have stayed indoors, stayed indoors, isolated
from other people, in rooms that weren’t well-ventilated. And in doing
so, they shielded themselves from other people’s opinions about the virus and
the mandates which followed it.
The government was evidently
too busy trying to sell us vaccines, to bother to remind us that diseases
remain longer in rooms that are not well-ventilated, or that practicing
distancing doesn’t mean you can’t go outside. Nor does it remind us that
staying inside all the time means we aren’t getting enough Vitamin D from the
sun, which is essential to building our immune health.
The government doesn’t want us
to know just how much vitamins can assist our immune response. And that’s
because “our” government is in the pocket of Big Pharma, and the federal health
laws are unconstitutional and written by politicians who are involved in insider
trading (in the medical device and pharmaceutical industries).
We all know that air can – and
does - get into our noses and mouths through the corners of the masks.
And the government is just
waiting for us to walk into the trap of the false solution to this problem: the
pro-vaccine politicians in the national and state governments want us to beg
them to mandate that we wear masks or respirators which even more securely
fasten onto our faces, creating air-tight seals. Seals which, incidentally, make
it difficult to breathe (if what you want to breathe is fresh air). We
should not fall for this.
Who is to say that this level
of protection is really necessary for anybody except for medical workers?
Certainly not the national government of the United States, which operates
under the auspices of the Constitution, which does not contain the word
“health” or “medicine” even once. The fact that these words are not mentioned,
means that any and all positive laws, regarding the health of people who do not
belong to a specific class of federal subjects, should have never been allowed
to come into existence in the first place. These laws eventually will be (and
ought to be, as soon as possible) declared null and void, as soon as some citizen
insists on defending his right, in court, to refrain from obeying that so-called
“law”.
Just because a procedure
should be strongly recommended, and followed, by health workers (for example,
federal health workers employed by the Veterans’ Administration), that doesn’t
mean it should be forced upon the general public. Yes; our health is
interconnected with other people’s, but the fact that the virus spreads more
quickly in highly-populated concentrated urban centers than more sparsely
populated states, should show us that we need to spread out. We need to make
use of small and medium-sized towns, start new towns in sparsely populated
areas (where it wouldn’t be environmentally unsound to do so), and put unused
western lands to a purpose.
And just because something
should be an advisory guideline, doesn’t mean people should have to go to jail
(or get fired) for not wearing a mask or not getting a vaccine.
The only way to reduce
political violence is to use peaceful administration instead of violent enforcement
to achieve political goals. To say otherwise is to commit oneself to
terroristic statism, being that the definition of the state includes the
legitimization and threat of violence.
That is why it is most ironic
that those who are protesting the government’s unconstitutional (read: illegal)
actions, are being branded as terrorists (especially in Canada and Australia).
Despite the perception of the
right-wing, that the Biden Administration is pro-immigrant, Vice President
Kamala Harris spoke in Guatemala in 2020, and cited the pandemic (and the risk
of Covid spreading due to free travel) to justify telling immigrants “do not come”.
http://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004074139/harris-tells-guatemalans-not-to-migrate-to-the-united-states
So instead of taking Doctors Without Borders and putting them on the border, we are putting in place the same kinds of international travel restrictions which were the reaction to the 1900s-10s Mexican typhus epidemic, and the 1930s typhus epidemic (which affected Eastern Europe, and many of the Jews who died in the Holocaust), complete with travel restrictions.
http://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004074139/harris-tells-guatemalans-not-to-migrate-to-the-united-states
So instead of taking Doctors Without Borders and putting them on the border, we are putting in place the same kinds of international travel restrictions which were the reaction to the 1900s-10s Mexican typhus epidemic, and the 1930s typhus epidemic (which affected Eastern Europe, and many of the Jews who died in the Holocaust), complete with travel restrictions.
Who knew that our right to
travel comes from our bosses? I don’t remember agreeing to that. It certainly
isn’t in the Constitution. Our freedom to travel comes from the fact that we
are human, cannot help but travel, and must travel in order to work and
other things. Amendment IX to the Constitution acknowledges that we have
rights which are not mentioned in the Constitution. Travel is one of these
rights.
Any limitation upon the
freedom of movement must be voluntary, and – if it causes someone to incur a
financial responsibility – compensation at fair market value.
Just the same, the fact that breathing
is not mentioned in the Constitution, does not mean that it is not one of our
rights.
The national government has no
business restricting the flow of air and oxygen in and out of our lungs, just
as it has no business restricting the free movement of people. We cannot live
without breathing, and anyone who is not being coerced and bullied would say
that they prefer to breathe unrestricted rather than restricted.
The mask is therefore an
unreasonable restriction upon the freedom to breathe, and the enforcement of
mask mandate laws should be challenged by anyone willing to go to court (and
risk jail time) to assert their rights.
No jury should be instructed,
by any judge or any law, that they must convict if the person committed the
offense; juries must be informed that they have the right to decide both the
facts and the law. Any American who could become a juror in such a case, should
resolve to never help enforce such laws, and say “not guilty” by reason that
the law is unconstitutional, and should not have been allowed to come into
existence, or be enforced, in the first place. And no matter how obviously
guilty a person is.
It is a sad statement that the
people who took to the streets to protest the murder of George Floyd, agreed to
wear masks while marching. They were, in effect, partially suffocating at the
time, while protesting a choking death at the hands of police.
To add insult to injury, many
of those who protested Floyd being choked to death, while masked, are
African-American, and many African-Americans suffer from sickle-cell anemia, a
disease characterized by low oxygen levels in the blood. Therefore, these
people – who are fighting for our freedom by protesting in the streets against
a government that knows how to do nothing except violence – are the last people
who should ever be masked.
Being that African-Americans are also disproportionately anti-vaccine as compared with the rest of the American population, it is a small miracle that
African-Americans have not been arrested en masse for refusing to wear
masks or get vaccinated.
Two months before George Floyd was murdered, a black man named Daniel Prude in Rochester, New York suffocated to death after a bag was placed over his head to prevent him from spitting on police.
Two months before George Floyd was murdered, a black man named Daniel Prude in Rochester, New York suffocated to death after a bag was placed over his head to prevent him from spitting on police.
http://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/02/nyregion/daniel-prude-rochester-police.html
When that murder happened, about three African-Americans were murdered by police every day in America. No matter how many are being murdered today, no amount of lessening of the violence and racism inherent in our law enforcement system should cause us to forget the horrors which people suffered during arrest in the year of 2020 (nor any other year).
When that murder happened, about three African-Americans were murdered by police every day in America. No matter how many are being murdered today, no amount of lessening of the violence and racism inherent in our law enforcement system should cause us to forget the horrors which people suffered during arrest in the year of 2020 (nor any other year).
We must not allow politicians
to convince us that we should obey health laws at the threat of force. If the
police are willing to use physical force against us, in order to get us to obey
these laws, then we know that these measures were never really about protecting
our health in the first place.
Moreover, in the early 2010s,
some American health care workers were bullied, by their employers and health
insurers, into giving up their smoke breaks, and even their right to smoke at
home on their own time (without paying for that privilege). Non-health workers,
too, were bullied with threats of higher insurance rates.
We’ve come a long way from
letting nurses smoke inside of hospitals decades ago, but that does not
mean that we need to allow the stigmatization of tobacco smoking to get out of
control, and turn into something that is dealt with through force, harsh
judgment, or excessive financial penalization.
Some people, especially those
who are left-leaning, seem to have the perception that people who smoke, and
take on extraordinary risks to their own health, are or could become “free
riders” on the public health system. But that perception is incorrect. The
problem with making sickly people “free-riders” doesn’t stem from individuals’
choices to be irresponsible; the problem stems from the fact that taxpayers are
made to foot the bill for the irresponsible health choices of people who are
complete strangers to them (and have little in common with them, other than
living in the same state or country).
If we want to stop smokers
(and other people who willingly take on extraordinary risks to their own
health) from being “free riders” on the public health system, then the way to
do that – which respects economic freedom and the need for public transparency
– would be for the government to either increase people’s taxes specifically
for the reason of helping them fund their own wellness care, or to exclude people
from public health services who do not wish to be affiliated with the
government. But then, we have to offer people the option of not being involved
at all with a government they believe is irredeemably corrupt.
Someone else smoking a
cigarette does not kill you. If you don’t like it, then stay at least twenty
feet away from them. Someone else potentially having a respiratory infection
does not kill you. If you don’t like that someone isn’t wearing a mask, then
stand at least six feet (at least) away from them.
Walking around in public with
a respiratory infection does not kill you or others. If you don’t want to get
sick, then you can wear a mask, and you can get vaccinated. If
you are worried about other people not getting vaccinated, and them
transmitting the disease to you, then you are worried about the effectiveness
about the vaccine that you received. So stop telling other people what
to do; instead, do more research on medications before you take them.
Stop telling other people what
to wear, and stay away from people whom you consider dangerous or
possibly sick.
The censorship is out of
control.
A few months ago, while I was
kicked off of YouTube, I was unable to watch videos on the channel that were
deemed to be “adult programming” (which includes some comedy videos). So I had
to figure out which of my YouTube accounts still worked.
On the positive side, that
made me get a new channel, and get back on YouTube. But I don’t appreciate
having to prove my age in order to watch videos, when it is the responsibility
of parents to make sure that their kids are not watching inappropriate
things.
I don’t appreciate Facebook
Messenger and Microsoft Office replacing my curse words with asterisks
when I dictate messages to friends. What if I get attacked in my own house, and
the easiest way to record what happens to me is to turn on Office? Any curse
words the burglar shouts at me would just get replaced with blanks. I’ll use Audacity
to record the audio, I guess.
But the point is this: The
irresponsibility of children, becomes a responsibility unto parents, but modern
parents derelict that responsibility, by transferring it to the government,
which transfers it to the people who run YouTube (owned by Google) and
Facebook. Facebook and Google, which are, respectively, contractors for the
C.I.A. and the Pentagon, then transfers the costs of protecting parents from
having to watch what their children are watching to make sure it’s appropriate,
onto me (who has chosen not to have children), through these unreasonable age
verification and security features.
On the internet and off,
health related and not, we are resorting to measures of social control which
border on things seen in Brave New World, The Matrix, and the
made-for-television movie The Boy in the Plastic Bubble starring John
Travolta. [Note: If you’ve read 1984 but not Brave New World, you
understand the mass surveillance dystopia, but you don’t fully understand the eugenics
dystopia.]
It is a shame that we have
resorted to making hand sanitizer (which dries-out the skin on our hands, and
often contains the toxic chemical wood alcohol) available in many public
places, in order to prevent the transmission of disease. Maybe if the so-called
“people of Wal-Mart” [a term referring to a website featuring photos of
unacceptable behavior of the “unwashed masses” of Wal-Mart customers] had been
told “cover your cough” – instead of being given a confusing combination of
“vaccinate this”, “distance that”, and “you kind of need vitamins or something”
– then maybe this all could have been solved without too many confusing rules.
I know I’m in the minority on
this – in terms of supporting physical distancing but opposing masking – but
what is the point of wearing masks, if people are still free to come within one
foot of each other in public and in businesses? What is the point of practicing
physical distancing, when companies in the service sector aren’t even training
their employees to stay six feet away from the customers? What is the point of
wearing a mask, if an employee can’t hear what I’m saying through the
mask without getting within six feet of me in order to hear my question?
Moreover, if Coronavirus and the vaccine for it don't give you problems with your jaws, then having to grit your teeth behind a mask just might.
http://www.keepsmilingsandiego.com/blog/could-covid-19-cause-tmj-dysfunction/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/12/15/pfizer-moderna-covid-vaccine-trials-and-bells-palsy-what-it/3904994001/
http://www.rochesteradvanceddentistry.com/blog/how-wearing-a-mask-can-cause-tmj-problems/
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/story/lifestyle/health-fitness/2020/12/17/ways-avoid-pain-wearing-mask-prevent-covid-19/3944950001/
Moreover, if Coronavirus and the vaccine for it don't give you problems with your jaws, then having to grit your teeth behind a mask just might.
http://www.keepsmilingsandiego.com/blog/could-covid-19-cause-tmj-dysfunction/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/12/15/pfizer-moderna-covid-vaccine-trials-and-bells-palsy-what-it/3904994001/
http://www.rochesteradvanceddentistry.com/blog/how-wearing-a-mask-can-cause-tmj-problems/
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/story/lifestyle/health-fitness/2020/12/17/ways-avoid-pain-wearing-mask-prevent-covid-19/3944950001/
Mandating that human beings
wear masks in public, has been almost completely pointless. Especially for
children; it has increased their levels of stress, beginning at a time when the
country was just beginning to recover from a large teen suicide epidemic.
And the mandates have resulted
in more online learning, which has led to more computer screen time for
children, when staring at a computer screen for more than 15 minutes at a time
can damage the eyes.
Also, since parents and close
relatives are more likely to molest children than teachers and strangers and
the general public, the stay-at-home quarantine orders have likely resulted in
more child molestation incidents than would have otherwise occurred without
such stay-at-home orders.
For adults, these mandates
have resulted in a more stressful shopping experience, forcing people to
speed-shop before the masks make their breathing uncomfortable. And it has led
to the ridicule of people who object, whether they seem to have a valid health
reason or not. It was hinted, to people with asthma, that they would not have
to go masked in public. But now there is such a stigma against not wearing a
mask, that asthmatics must live in fear of being labeled a Trump supporter if
they go to a store unmasked. Not labeled sick, or a potential health
threat, mind you; just a Trump supporter. As if that has anything to do with
how transmissible the bacteria and viruses in your body may be.
Covid-19 pandemic-related
mandates have, thus, been ill-advised, counter-productive, and even deleterious
to our health.
Director of N.I.A.I.D. Anthony
Fauci has admitted that, when sweat and breath mix inside of a mask, it creates
an environment which is conducive to the growth of bacteria, which could fester
in the respiratory system.
The fact that the mask
mandates effectively force people to wear certain articles of clothing - in
exchange for the so-called “privilege” of walking around in public - reeks of
Nazi-era yellow Stars of David for Jews (and red triangles for communists and
people who might help Jews), has evidently been lost on the Biden
Administration and its supporters.
The pro-vaccine crowd loves to
grand-stand, and ridicule people who refuse to get vaccinated and who don’t
like wearing the mask. Vaccine enthusiasts ridicule such people as Nazis
themselves, for comparing popular modern laws to authoritarian measures.
Nevermind the fact that the “vaccine-hesitant” (or so-called “anti-vaxxers”)
are comparing new laws to old Nazi laws in order to stop the government from
issuing more authoritarian edicts. The sensitivity of some unknown Jewish
people who might hypothetically object to this rhetoric, matters much more, to
pro-vaccine voters and politicians, than people being able to breathe
comfortably. The need to avoid mentioning the Holocaust outweighs the needs of
the people of the State of Israel to go on, with their blood flowing normally,
their cells uncorroded by the effects of the vaccine, and their veins not clogged
with blood clots from the vaccine.
The logic of the pro-vaccine
politicians is that we have to vaccinate the Jews in Israel nearly to death, in
order to stick it to the Nazi right wing of America, for trying to stop the
government from becoming more authoritarian. It makes sense… if the
punishment for not agreeing is imprisonment.
Make no mistake; the mask
wearing mandate is potentially as dangerous as forced wearing of red
triangles and yellow stars. Remember two things: 1) the government does not
have the power to tell us what to wear; and 2) Jews weren’t the only people who
were told to wear certain articles of clothing.
The power of the government to
make us wear certain articles of clothing, comes from the same place as the
power to prohibit us from wearing certain articles of clothing. I’d like
to say that this power comes from nowhere, but it comes from the will of
law enforcement officials to resort to force, to enforce what they believe are
lawful orders, but which are actually unconstitutional.
But more importantly, and to
the point at hand, the power to decide what people shall wear, risks public
disrobing for those who disobey. As the saying goes (sometimes attributed
to Thomas Jefferson), “A government big enough to give you everything you want,
is a government big enough to take away everything that you have.”
We must not forget that the
Nazis pulled Jewish women out of their homes and stripped them naked, nor that
a school boy in Texas had his right to ventilation, warmth, and human contact
temporarily taken away as a punishment for not obeying all the rules.
We are not even allowed to
discuss what the vaccines might be doing to our DNA; it may do nothing at all,
but any mention of such a concern prompts censorship (for example, on YouTube).
It should be clear, now, that
these systems of control want no less than total control over us. Not only over
our health, but also what we shall wear, how we use our bodies, and (in the
case of slaves, sex slaves, and victims of workplace abuse) whom we are allowed
to deny the right to touch our genitals.
While I cannot respect some of
Michel Foucault’s opinions regarding sexuality, I’ll admit that Foucault was
absolutely right to point out that the government has an interest in keeping
people’s reproductive rates under control; namely, to prevent revolution, by
keeping the population small, and easily controllable.
Thus, we should not ignore the
connection of political control to sexual control.
What is not being taught, in
schools today, regarding World War II, is that authoritarianism swept Western
European countries along with nationalism, and athleticism.
The rise of ultra-nationalism
coincided with the enthusiastic cross-cultural adoption of new team sports by
nations such as Britain, France, and Germany. This was justified by a
need to compete against other nations, as well as an intense obsession of the
public with the individual bodies of any given person who might eventually be
in subservience of the given state.
That athleticism comes
hand-in-hand with grooming, narcissism, and aesthetic materialism; an obsession
with looks, and looking “modern”, which trumps all other needs (except those
directly related to health, strength, and ability to work, exert force, and do
as you’re told).
Those who do not understand
the links between competition and sexuality and fascism, need look no further
than the 1936 Olympics, held in Berlin, or observe the portrayal of male and
female beauty (and nudity) in Leni Riefenstahl’s Olympia, her 1938
documentary on the Olympics.
All over the country,
people are realizing that the mask mandate is not (and was never) so much as a
health mandate, as much as it is a gesture of blind obedience to the government.
This gesture indicates not
only a faith that the masks are working, but a faith in taxpayer-funded and
government-controlled medical science, and in the advice it gives, and in the
often unconstitutional laws which are based on it.
If the mask is not this
generation’s Star of David, then it is this generation’s Nazi salute (“sieg
heil” / “hail victory”). Like Seinfeld’s “Cosmo Kramer” character,
supporting people with A.I.D.S. by marching but refusing to “wear the ribbon”, we
are shunned who refuse to wear the mask, as if we have taken the side of the
disease.
Inevitably, those who appear
to have “taken the side of the disease” eventually get compared to the virus
itself, or described as “tumors”, and other dehumanizing names. Left-leaning
people should be above using this kind of rhetoric, because to dehumanize your
enemies in order to discredit and silence them, is to stoop to authoritarian
behavior which does not respect humanity or unapproved human voices.
Justin Trudeau, for example,
has even spoken of those who protest the mandate as having “unacceptable”
views. Fortunately, however, Trudeau has ceased demanding that emergency powers
be invoked. This came after he was criticized for failing to justify why the
current emergency requires passing new laws in addition to the governmental
powers which are already in place.
All of this makes it hard to
deny that that the Covid-19 pandemic has been weaponized for legislative and
political purposes.
All of these incursions – into
our freedom of speech, our freedoms to work and travel, our parenting rights,
and our right to have privacy with our doctors - in no way achieves what
I believe the societal goal should be in response to Covid-19; that is, the
response to the pandemic should not be more harmful than the virus itself.
The only people who should be
wearing masks are people who are at a high risk of contracting respiratory
diseases (such as heavy smokers, people who already have such diseases, people
who are obese, and people who are over 80 years old).
And also, anybody who wishes
to continue wearing a mask. Repealing mask mandates does absolutely nothing to
stop people from wearing masks in public if they wish to do so. And people who
continue to wear the mask, after the mandate expires, will be free to shame
others for not wearing one.
After the mask mandates and
vaccine requirements go away, the only people left complaining will be those
who obeyed the laws, and are angry, bitter, and resentful about the fact that other
people were able to resist being coerced and pressured and guilt-tripped
and demonized into obeying the same laws.
The only people complaining
will be those who want to force others to behave a certain way, because they
don’t know how to leave other people alone.
As tone-deaf as this may
sound, I have to admit that I often wonder how the protesters in Kenosha,
Wisconsin would have treated Kyle Rittenhouse, if they had remembered that they
are supposed to stay six feet away from other people in public at all times, as
part of obeying the coronavirus restrictions which many of them (perhaps even
most of them) support.
Part of freedom is learning how
to leave people alone.
The only reason that the
government should be recommending that people stay six feet apart, is because,
if other people can’t come within six feet of you, then they can’t steal from
you, mug you, or rape you. They can communicate disease, though, because
according to some sources, air particles travel an average of twenty
feet before they settle.
But then, of course, pointing
this out, risks getting us caught in the same trap, as with the masks. Are we
really going to start demanding forced separation by twenty feet? How are we to
expect people to obey such a law, when they can’t even handle staying six
feet apart?
And at what point does that
forced separation begin to resemble segregation? After all, politicians
such as Gavin Newsom and Justin Trudeau have not hesitated to hint at the need
to separate the masked and vaccinated from the unmasked and unvaccinated. The
unmasked and unvaccinated – and the insufficiently vaccinated - are
being made into second-class citizens.
What adds insult to injury is
that we could have fixed or prevented a lot of the problems we are seeing now,
for which mandates have had to correct, a long time ago.
To accommodate a six-foot
physical distancing rule, rebuilding and/or retro-fitting businesses (as well
as public thoroughfares, sidewalks, bike lanes, public transit of all kinds, etc.),
would be an ordeal enough of its own accord, without a twenty-foot mandate in
place. But a six-foot rule might have been workable.
Ten years ago, if cities
across the nation had passed ordinances which would have required that any and
all new businesses be environmentally sound, then that would have allowed architects
to take a collective pause before they took on the task of designing buildings
for the future. They would have been better able to avoid cramming large
numbers of people into elevators, onto streets of cities that have few cars,
and into crowded subways, which decreases the amount of air available for each
person to breathe, risking transmission of respiratory illness in the process.
While I support the existence
of six-foot physical distancing inasmuch as they are optional guidelines,
I feel that way not because they shouldn’t be obeyed, but because they
shouldn’t be enforced (using physical force) by the government.
I do not trust the government
to do such a thing. I don’t believe it would be constitutional. And there will
never be enough police officers to make sure everyone is masked (and obeying
physical distancing, etc.), so I don’t even think it would be logistically
possible to enforce, even if I believed that it were desirable.
That is why I would like the
freedom to “enforce” the six-foot-distancing guideline myself. Which I
will do by punching anyone who comes within six feet of me.
Of course, this will only work
well if most people are aware that I am planning to do that. That’s why
I’d like to get my website up and running as soon as possible, so I can sell
custom-made “Watch This Motherfucker Get Within Six Feet of Me” T-shirts. If we
can get enough people wearing shirts like that, then maybe mass voluntary
obedience of the six-foot physical distancing ordinances, could someday become
a realistic possibility.
But also, people would have to
be prepared to avoid each other sufficiently, to the point that few
people would ever even consider coming anywhere close to six feet
away from another person. Remember, it’s a six-foot minimum. There’s
nothing that stops you from staying farther from other people than a
mere six feet.
Use your discretion, but be
responsible, and remember that the government is (probably) never going to take
your side, whether you’re on the right side, or the wrong side, or the
legal side, or the illegal side. It all depends on which police officer
is called to get involved in the dispute, how paranoid and/or violent the
officer is, and which citizen looks the most unstable when the cops arrive on
the scene.
We have to be prepared to
defend our rights to do as we please without hurting others. Notice that I said
“without hurting others”; not “without potentially risking hurting
others”. If there is no victim, then there is no crime. In order to do that, we
have to know the law better than the police do. Or else we are going to end up
getting choked to death by police, and charged with attempted murder for
coughing in public.
Federal health laws which
claim to pertain to anyone other than federal health workers, do not have to be
obeyed by the general public. Amendments IX and X to the Constitution mean that
legal policy regarding health, being a topic not mentioned in the Constitution,
is up to the states or the people, not Congress or any part of the
national government.
As such, the proper, legal, and
constitutional way to fight unnecessary coronavirus-related restrictions, is to
look for an incidence in which the president has enforced an unconstitutional
“law” after the Supreme Court has already told him to stop doing so.
Meanwhile, at the state and
local levels, all state governors and mayors should be urged to repeal all
mandates regarding masks and vaccines. This should be done in order to
accommodate people who are “pro-vaccine, but anti-mandate” (such as the
majority of the truckers protesting at the U.S.-Canadian border, who are
vaccinated).
We must repeal these mandates
in order to respect the consent of the governed, and in order to obey the 13th
Amendment prohibition on involuntary servitude except as punishment for a
crime. Bodily autonomy, and the informed consent of the individual, must be
respected at all times - and victimless crimes must not be treated as felonies
whose punishment include travel restrictions – or else we do not have a
government that protects our right to be free from becoming subject to another person's control.
We must also oppose
unreasonable prohibitions, in addition to opposing mandates. That way,
“pro-vaxxers” will not get confused into thinking that those who don’t get
vaccinated are all against vaccination altogether. But then, of course, the problem is not that they are confused into thinking this; in fact, they pretend to be confused, because they want to believe the worst about their political rivals.
Likewise, those who don’t get vaccinated, should not be free to stop people from getting vaccinated if they wish to do so. So infiltrating a pharmaceutical lab and throwing out hundreds of doses of vaccines, should still be a punishable offense.
Likewise, those who don’t get vaccinated, should not be free to stop people from getting vaccinated if they wish to do so. So infiltrating a pharmaceutical lab and throwing out hundreds of doses of vaccines, should still be a punishable offense.
Your body is yours; stay over
there with it. I’ll stay over here with mine. Don’t tell me what to do with my
body, and I won’t tell you what to do with yours. This should not be a concept
that makes us start arguing about Democrats and Republicans. Both
parties have long track records of failing to respect consent.
We must stop this failure to respect the consent of the governed, from turning into a race to the bottom; a race to placate the lowest common denominator.
We must stop this failure to respect the consent of the governed, from turning into a race to the bottom; a race to placate the lowest common denominator.
Part II: Stop Suffocating Your Kid, and Stop Being Obsessed with Other People’s Bodies
The time has come to stop
being obsessed with each other’s bodies.
I have seen enough memes and
political cartoons, comparing people’s mouths to their genitals and assholes.
My mouth is not my asshole. You are committing sexual humiliation. If you can’t
distinguish my mouth from my asshole, then you need mental help or sex
addiction therapy.
If humans needed another flap,
covering their mouths, then we would have been born with those flaps. In fact,
we already have such flaps, because we have lips (which make our mouths
closeable) and our noses can be pinched closed. We do not need additional
flaps. We just need reminders to cover our cough.
If you are telling me what I
can and can’t wear, then you are either infantilizing me, trying to rape me,
you’re a member of the cast of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy on Bravo,
or you’re a fascist. Stop controlling other people.
Also, your children need to
breathe.
Forget about that for a
second. A lot of you motherfuckers don’t even give your kids water. You
give them drinks with fake sugar and salt in them, which makes them more thirsty.
Then you dehydrate them further by covering their faces with masks.
You know how the air is dry?
Well, if you walk around breathing that shit for long enough, eventually you
need a sip of water. It may surprise you, but being a child does not make you
immune from this dilemma.
You know how your kids are
screaming all the time? They’re not just being disobedient, or doing it to piss
you off. They want food, or a drink of something.
Give them a bottle of water:
1) It will shut them up by literally allowing them to close their mouths around
something; 2) literally 70% of their bodies are made of water, so they
need it more than you think they do; 3) it prevents earaches, which decreases
the chances that they’ll cry due to ear pain; and 4) it provides them with the
water they’ll need to cry in order to cope with the next round of disappointment
that life deals them.
Corking your child’s mouth
shut with a bottle of water is the most basic level of parenting, and yet many
people fail to achieve this simple goal.
Now that you understand that
your children need water, let’s move on to air.
First: The fact that the mask
allows your child to breathe at all, means it’s ineffective at
fulfilling its purpose; because bacteria can enter through the corners.
Second: The fact that your
child’s breathing is not totally restricted by the mask, does not mean
that it is acceptable for you commit to more drastic measures, partially
choking your child in the process. The fact that the government wants you
to choke your kid, does not make it OK. The government is giving you Munchausen
syndrome by proxy (M.S.B.P.); it is tricking you into thinking that you are
going to help your child’s health by decreasing their oxygen
level. You are prolonging the problem by doing the opposite of what’s
necessary; which is letting your child run around outside to get fresh air and
sunshine.
Third: The fact that your kid
doesn’t complain about the mask, doesn’t mean that adults don’t have the right
to do so. How do I know? Maybe your child is especially submissive. And maybe
the reason why he does everything that he is told, is that you abuse him.
Your decision to order your
kid around until he’s as submissive as a potential rape victim or kidnapping
victim – and is too afraid of authority to resist adults who try to hurt him
(including his teachers, and, potentially, his parents) – has nothing to do
with my need to breathe fresh air, unfiltered, without a piece of fabric in
front of my mouth.
Stop conditioning your child to
suppress their natural urge to breathe air freely, and their natural urge to
question and challenge people who claim to have authority. Teach your child
that, in a free society, authority which is wielded without the authorization
of the subject, is illegitimate, and deserves to be questioned.
The facts that children have
certain needs, and medical workers have certain responsibilities, does not mean
that I, nor any member of the general public, must give up our rights.
If the government regulating
your access to reproductive health needs, hasn’t tipped you off enough yet, the
government wants to control your sexuality. If the Epstein-Maxwell scandal, and
the Weiner scandal, and the Dennis Hastert scandal, and the Lawrence King
scandal, and government scanning your body at the airport, and telling you what
to wear, and public school teachers defending themselves with taxpayer money
and involuntarily collected union dues to fund the legal defense of teachers
who (collectively, in America) molest dozens of kids every school day, hasn’t
tipped you off, the government want to fuck your kid.
The government wants to make
you look like a bad parent, for arbitrarily reasons (like that you smoke
marijuana, or have unusual discipline techniques). Once your kid is in the
state’s “care”, it can send your kid to a foster home (where he can easily be
scooped up by an abusive foster couple, and even put in cages while the foster
parents collect support money).
Then, after the abuse, your
kid will become drug-addicted, and a criminal, where they can easily be
arrested, and sent to a for-profit prison in “Kids-for-Cash” schemes.
And if your kid already got
raped, then the government will help the rapist stay close to him.
The Lawrence King, Dennis
Hastert, Anthony Weiner, and Epstein-Maxwell child sex scandals were real. The
government wants to fuck your kid. And depending on what race you are, and who
you’re having sex with, it may even want to sterilize you, or subject you to
unnecessary abortions.
They sterilized Native
Americans, the F.B.I. forced Lakota at Wounded Knee to give birth surrounded by
a hail of gunfire. Don’t put anything past these people.
My body doesn’t belong to you.
We have to end the grooming,
and establish a society based on consent. My health is my responsibility; and
it only becomes the responsibility of others if they consent to take care of
me.
We cannot tolerate bullying
people into accepting needles stuck into their arms, swabs shoved into their
noses, masks put onto their faces, on the grounds that they are “scared” and
“it’s not so bad”. The rhetoric used to “urge” people to get vaccinated,
resembles the same rhetoric used by bullies (“stop hitting yourself”)
and by Munchausen mothers and nurses.
[see the next post to read the remaining sections of this article:]
Part III: What American Sex Scandals Have to Do with Ukraine
Part IV: Jean-Luc Brunel
Part V: The Russo-Ukrainian War
Part VI: Conclusions
Written on February 25th, and March 2nd and 3rd,
2022
Originally Published on March 3rd, 2022,
as "Reaction to the News of Late February 2022:
The Death of Jean-Luc Brunel, the End of Covid Mandates,
and the Russo-Ukrainian War [Incomplete]"
Title changed on March 10th, 2022
None of the images nor memes included in this article
were created by the author.
Some images added on March 10th, 2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment