Requiem for a Nation • Can America Survive the New Normal?

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” - Voltaire

‘The remedy is worse than the disease.’ - Francis Bacon

“We should take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties." - James Madison (4th President of the United States)

As with every other epidemic in our history, I have no doubt the majority of Americans will survive COVID-19.   It remains to be seen, however, whether our freedoms will survive our government’s heavy-handed response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which over the past 18-months has torn at the very fabric of our republic.

The methods employed are common to all oppressive governments:  suppression and control of information, which leads to a lack of transparency and informed debate; followed by isolation and condemnation of all dissenting viewpoints, marginalization, and convincing people that the inalienable rights they were born with are now relegated to the status of being nothing more than mere ‘privileges.’

Roughly 8 months after the Pfizer-BioNTech jab was first approved for public use after receiving an unprecedented emergency authorization, it has now officially become the first to receive full approval by the FDA, raising deeper more serious questions about how one can approve a ‘vaccine’ that is supposed to have a fixed-dose regimen when you can’t answer how many doses are involved in the regimen to begin with, let alone attest to their safety.

While the FDA approved Pfizer’s shot, regulators also said they determined that there are “increased risks” of myocarditis and pericarditis, or heart inflammation, following administration, particularly within the seven days following the second dose of the two-dose regimen.

From their very report: “The observed risk is higher among males under 40 years of age compared to females and older males. The observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age. Available data from short-term follow-up suggest that most individuals have had resolution of symptoms. However, some individuals required intensive care support. Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes. The Comirnaty Prescribing Information (pdf) includes a warning about these risks,” the agency said.

For the record, I am not an anti-vaxxer. I am an anti-global-all-at-once-experimental-vaxxer. There is a big difference. Most vaccines require years to test and approve because we want to make sure they don’t have dangerous long-term side effects, which they can have. Many experimental vaccines never make it out of the experimental phase.  CNN made similar points back when Trump was pushing for rapid approval of the Covid vaccines, but hastened to forget all that when the Biden administration decided rapid vaccine deployment was a good idea.

For all the good they certainly have done, physicians warn us that vaccines can be dangerous for some, and experimental vaccines are naturally even more so. Again, my point is simple and absolutely factual. The three things we do know about it is: 1) an experimental vaccine; 2) affects billions of people (over two billion); receiving it all at the same time.

This was highlighted again by an unexpected Bloomberg article, which was published last weekend, that began: Anecdotes tell us what the data can’t: Vaccinated people appear to be getting the coronavirus at a surprisingly high rate. But exactly how often isn’t clear, nor is it certain how likely they are to spread the virus to others. 

The rationale the CDC is citing to claim the Delta variant renders the vaccines substantially less effective for stopping infection than President Biden was touting are the same ones that have been hyped with unrelenting propaganda for many months, including stigmatization and demonization of those who refuse.   But apparently rationales and 100 years of proven science are supposed to mutate at the same pace as the virus itself.

To be sure, the claim that breakthrough infections (PCR positives in vaccinated individuals) might be more common than thought could in fact be true. Of the four people I know whom have contracted it, three have been vaccinated; and it is a general principle of immunology that for viruses that mutate quickly, inoculation cannot always keep up as an infection preventive.

This is one reason that these fields have for the better part of 100 years observed that natural immunity is to be preferred if that is an option. It is safer and more globally effective for pathogens that are mild for most people, which is exactly what the science is showing yet again now.

Vaccines are glorious for stable viruses (measles, smallpox), but less comprehensively effective for flus and coronaviruses – which is saying nothing controversial. I should add.

For example, a study from a Houston, Texas, hospital shows that the Delta variant is more transmissible than the wild type or other mutations. “Delta variants caused a significantly higher rate of vaccine breakthrough cases (19.7% compared to 5.8% for all other variants)” and yet there are fewer hospitalizations and deaths – which is another point for traditional virus theory: as a rule of thumb, variants of these pathogens are more prevalent but less severe.

We’ve long known that – or did until 2020 when we decided to scrap a century’s worth of public health wisdom.

OCLA researcher Dr. Denis Rancourt and several fellow Canadian academics penned an Open Letter to support those who have decided not to accept the COVID-19 vaccine. The group emphasizes the voluntary nature of this medical treatment as well as the need for informed consent and individual risk-benefit assessment.  Indeed, control over our bodily integrity is undoubtedly turning out to be the ultimate frontier in the fight to protect our civil liberties.

Highlights of this Open Letter stated the following key points:

• You have a right to assert guardianship of your body and to refuse medical treatments if you see fit.

• You are right to question whether free and informed consent is at all possible under present circumstances. Long-term effects are unknown. Trans-generational effects are unknown. Vaccine-induced deregulation of natural immunity is unknown. Potential harm is unknown as the adverse event reporting is delayed, incomplete and inconsistent between jurisdictions.

• You are inaccurately accused of being a factory for new SARS-CoV-2 variants, when in fact, according to leading scientists, your natural immune system generates immunity to multiple components of the virus. This will promote your protection against a vast range of viral variants and abrogates further spread to anyone else.

• You are justified in demanding independent peer-reviewed studies, not funded by multinational pharmaceutical companies. All the peer-reviewed studies of short-term safety and short-term efficacy have been funded, organized, coordinated, and supported by these for-profit corporations; and none of the study data have been made public or available to researchers who don’t work for these companies.

• You are correct in your calls for a diversity of scientific opinions. Like in nature, we need a polyculture of information and its interpretations. And we don’t have that right now.

• Choosing not to take the vaccine is holding space for reason, transparency and accountability to emerge. You are right to ask, ‘What comes next when we give away authority over our own bodies?’

This letter concludes: Do not be intimidated. You are showing resilience, integrity and grit. You are coming together in your communities, making plans to help one another and standing for scientific accountability and free speech, which are required for society to thrive. We are among many who stand with you.

Here are the doctors, researches, and medical professionals who signed it:  Angela Durante, PhD; Denis Rancourt, PhD; Claus Rinner, PhD; Laurent Leduc, PhD; Donald Welsh, PhD; John Zwaagstra, PhD; Jan Vrbik, PhD; Valentina Capurri, PhD.

Medical Totalitarianism & the ‘New Normal’

The sad reality is this entire exercise regarding these hastily approved experiments has been centered and fixated more upon control and the usurpation of freedom more than it has health, pure and simple.  A vaccine by definition provides immunity to a disease. This does not provide immunity to anything. In a best-case scenario, it merely reduces the chance of getting a severe case of a virus if one catches it. Hence, it is more of a medical treatment, not a vaccine.

Secondly, the presumed benefits of this medical treatment are minimal. The establishment acknowledges this, and is already talking about additional shots and ever-increasing numbers of new “vaccines” that will be required on a regular basis. 

Does this logically mean people who refuse to turn themselves into chronic patients who receive injections of new pharmaceutical products on a regular basis simply to reduce chances of getting a severe case of a virus that these injections do not even prevent should be denied entries to restaurants or denied employment?

Fact: An imperfect vaccine can lead to 'highly virulent pathogens,' and 'vaccines that keep the host alive but still allow transmission can thus allow virulent strains to circulate in a population.'  The very sort of environment that we’re creating by having so many people vaccinated with a vaccine that doesn’t kill off the virus,  can lead to a more potent virus.

Try finding that story anywhere. This information comes from a peer reviewed paper published in 2015, in which its authors - from Penn State and the Pirbright Institute concluded that "anti-disease vaccines that do not prevent transmission can create conditions that promote the emergence of pathogen strains that cause more severe disease in unvaccinated hosts."

Many states are reporting 40 to 50% of hospitalizations consist of those who got the poke, along with mounting evidence that by increasing infectiousness and resistance to spike protein (S)-directed antibodies (Abs), protection is diminishing in vaccinees, threatening the unvaccinated who have not developed sufficient natural antibodies, and helping to augment the crisis.

It is a general principle of immunology that for viruses that mutate quickly, inoculation cannot always keep up as an infection preventive. This is one reason that these fields have for the better part of 100 years observed that natural immunity is to be preferred if that is an option.

It is safer and more globally effective for pathogens that are mild for most people, which is exactly what the science is showing yet again now. Vaccines are glorious for stable viruses (measles, smallpox), but less comprehensively effective for flus and coronaviruses – which is saying nothing controversial. 

There is zero proof to suggest that non-injected people are the ones now functioning as “viral factories”. To the contrary, the injected could well have been marked with toxic chemicals that are mutating into new forms of illness that are sending people to the hospital with “Covid.”

An article recently published in Quanta Magazine warns that just like how taking antibiotics breeds antibiotic-resistant “superbugs,” taking these so-called vaccines contributes to the breeding of new variants that send some people to the hospital – or worse.

The piece discusses the history of the anti-Marek’s disease vaccine for chickens, which was first introduced back in 1970. It has had to be reinvented some three different times now because the virus continues to mutate to evade the vaccine.

The reason for this, of course, is that vaccines produce fake immunity, at best – fake meaning the type of immunity that wanes over time. Real immunity, which is produced by the immune system, lasts a lifetime.  Viruses mutate all the time, and vaccines can often make things worse.

How does this all relate to Fauci Flu shots? The answer is simple: The jabs could be causing the Virus to morph into ever-new variants, which then turn into more new variants.   Damaged immune systems are now prone to spreading more illness, typically to other vaccinated people whose disease defenses have also been degraded.

While the mainstream media wants you to believe the opposite, the fact remains that injected people are the worst off when it comes to the risks involved with variant spread.  Even partially vaccinated people “might serve as sort of a breeding ground for the virus to acquire new mutations,” warns Paul Bieniasz, a Howard Hughes investigator at The Rockefeller University.

This, of course, runs contrary to media and government claims that unvaccinated people are somehow responsible for the vaccine-induced spread of new Wuhan Flu variants.  Richard Harris, NPR‘s science correspondent, warns of much the same. He says there is intense “evolutionary pressure” at play that renders vaccines unable to “completely block infection.”

“Many vaccines, apparently, including the Covid vaccines, do not completely prevent a virus from multiplying inside someone even though these vaccines do prevent serious illness,” he alleges, toting the government line about the jabs supposedly minimizing the risk of serious illness.

One thing the major media is not telling people is the fact that each new variant is becoming increasingly less dangerous, even if some of them are allegedly more contagious. So at this point you have to ask yourself, is it really about health when the disease has over a 98% survival rate for those age 75 and younger?

The point is where there is risk to an individual involved from taking the vaccine, then  there must also be choice.

The Danger of Using Government Powers to Protect Us From Ourselves

This whole crisis has been politicized from its inception - especially the way it’s been handled each step of the way. Nursing home deaths could have been avoided if we had quarantined the ill (as we've done throughout history in all previous pandemics) instead of co-mingling them with healthy people and telling them to stay locked down instead.

Mandatory vaccination is a violation of the Nuremberg Accords, especially insofar as those accords mandate the notion of informed consent. How can you have informed consent when the government has sealed their protocol related to the virus and treatments for THIRTY YEARS?   This is information that the public has a right to know, and the government has a responsibility to share before they start infringing upon Constitutional liberties guaranteed (theoretically at least) in the Bill of Rights.

Now that the government has gotten a taste for flexing its police state powers by way of a bevy of lockdowns, mandates, restrictions, contact tracing programs, heightened surveillance, censorship, overcriminalization, etc., we may all be long-haulers, suffering under the weight of long-term COVID-19 afflictions.

Instead of dealing with the headaches, fatigue and neurological aftereffects of the virus, however, “we the people” may well find ourselves burdened with a Nanny State inclined to use its Draconian pandemic powers to protect us from ourselves.

As John W. Whitehead cogently points out, therein lies the danger of the government’s growing addiction to power.

What started out 18 months ago as an apparent effort to prevent a novel coronavirus from sickening the nation (and the world) has become yet another means by which world governments (including our own) can expand their powers, abuse their authority, and further oppress their constituents.

Until recently, the police state had been more circumspect in its power grabs, but this latest state of emergency has brought the beast out of the shadows.    It’s a given that you can always count on the government to take advantage of a crisis, legitimate or manufactured, which has proven true time and again since the Twin Towers attacks on 9/11/ twenty years ago.  Emboldened by the citizenry’s inattention and willingness to tolerate its abuses, the government has weaponized one national crisis after another in order to expand its powers.

The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.

It doesn’t even matter what the nature of the crisis might be—civil unrest, the national emergencies, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters”—as long as it allows the government to justify all manner of tyranny in the name of so-called national security.

This coronavirus pandemic has been no exception.   Federal and state governments unraveled the constitutional fabric of the nation with lockdown mandates that sent the economy into a tailspin and wrought havoc with our liberties.  What started off as an experiment in social distancing in order to flatten the curve of this virus, and not overwhelm the nation’s hospitals or expose the most vulnerable to unavoidable loss of life scenarios,  quickly became strongly worded suggestions for citizens to voluntarily stay at home and strong-armed house arrest orders with penalties in place for non-compliance.

Every day brought a drastic new set of restrictions by government bodies (most have been delivered by way of executive orders) at the local, state and federal level that were eager to flex their muscles for the so-called “good” of the populace.

And now here we are.

Whatever unprecedented practices you allow the government to carry out now—whether it’s in the name of national security or protecting America’s borders or making America healthy again—rest assured, these same practices can and will be used against you when the government decides to set its sights on you.  This is why our forefathers established a Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution.

The war on terror turned out to be a war on the American people, waged with warrantless surveillance and indefinite detention. The war on immigration turned out to be a war on the American people, waged with roving government agents demanding “papers, please.   This war on COVID-19 is ushering in yet another war on the American people, waged with all of the surveillance weaponry at the government’s disposal: thermal imaging cameras, drones, contact tracing, biometric databases, etc.

Unless we find some way to rein in the government’s power grabs, the fall-out will be epic. Government overreach, invasive surveillance, martial law, abuse of powers, militarized police, weaponized technology used to track and control the citizenry, and so  on—has coalesced into this present moment.

What we are witnessing now is what happens when countries tolerate authoritarians, even for a moment. Has there ever been a clearer window into the society they’re trying to build? Our formerly middle-class nation now has a serf class.  We now have two groups of Americans, not a broad middle. The favored and the unfavored. The saved and the damned. The vaccinated and the unvaccinated. That’s how the architects of all this see the country.

What happens next is up to each and every one of us.  When freedom and liberty is at stake, no one can afford to be silent.