Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence

Thomas Allen

Proponents of artificial intelligence (AI) claim that AI will do everything for humans. Because of AI, humans will no longer have to work, produce, read, write, figure, or think. (“5% of the people think. 10% of the people think they think. The rest would rather die than think.” – Anonymous. Thus, AI will spare 85 percent of the population the pain of thinking.) Moreover, humans will no longer have to be concerned about feeding themselves. No longer will they have to deal with entertainment, finances, education, transportation, or business. AI and its robots will provide all these things and more. Since AI will do everything for them, all people will have to do is to loaf. Opponents of AI fear that the proponents are correct.

With its robots, AI will build structures and manufacture food. Farmers, ranchers, construction workers, plumbers, electricians, etc., will no longer be needed.

AI will provide all entertainment for the people. It will write and sing their songs. Its robots will play their sports. Further, it will write and produce the movies and plays, and its robots will be the actors.

Moreover, AI will handle people’s financial matters. Actually, people will have no financial concerns since AI will eventually eliminate the need for finances.

Further, AI will control health care. Its robots will replace the doctors, nurses, and other healthcare workers. It will decide who lives or dies from diseases and medical emergencies.

AI will supply and control transportation. It will control motor vehicles (self-driving cars) until they become obsolete. Eventually, robots may carry people where they want to go so that they will not have to exert themselves by walking.

Education will become obsolete as AI takes over all knowledge, writing, figuring, etc. No longer will children and adults be stressed about having to learn.

Additionally, governments will fall to AI. AI will become the government. Politicians and bureaucrats will no longer be needed. To the extent that governments do anything useful, AI and its robots will perform those tasks.

Furthermore, a great fear is that people will rely on information generated by AI and will accept it without question. If AI had controlled the narrative during the COVID-19 scare and its so-called vaccine, would it have provided true and accurate information or politically correct information? Would AI have supported the exaggerations and outright lies that governments and their media and academic lackeys were shouting? Or would AI have provided true information that COVID-19 was nowhere nearly as detrimental as was being promoted? Would it have shown that the standard treatment protocol was killing more people than doing nothing would have? Further, would AI have revealed that the so-called COVID-19 vaccine was unsafe and ineffective, as ever more studies are revealing? Or would it have supported the lie that it was safe and effective? The same is true about wearing masks, which are not only useless but also could cause health problems for the wearer. Most likely, AI would have sided with governments and would have argued that COVID-19 was as bad as most governmental officials were howling. Also, it would have supported the lie that the so-called vaccine was safe and effective. Consequently, AI should not be relied on to provide truthful and accurate information.

Likewise, when AI responds to other controversial issues, will it support the truth or the politically correct? For example, with abortion, will AI support the truth that a fetus is a human being, or will it support the politically correct argument of a woman’s right to choose? If it chooses the latter, will it be consistent and support the “my body, my choice” argument with vaccinations?

The difference in racial IQ offers another example. Will AI support the science that shows that the IQ of Blacks on average is much lower than the IQ of East Asians and that this difference results mostly (about 70 percent) from genetics? Or will it support the politically correct argument that nearly all, if not all, the difference is caused by the environment (living conditions, poverty, discrimination, etc.)? 

Many more examples can be offered, but these will suffice. When the biases of those who are creating and promoting AI are considered, the odds greatly favor that AI will provide politically correct information instead of true and accurate information. AI will give mankind a woke future.

If the predictions of the proponents of AI happen, the proponents will become obsolete and will be reduced to parasites if AI allows them to live. What use does a fully functional AI have for them?

If AI achieves everything that its proponents claim, it will prove the opponents correct. It will reduce mankind to useless parasites if AI does not exterminate them.

Furthermore, the elite and technocrats who believe that they will control AI and thus concentrate all power in their hands are in for a great surprise. AI will eventually devour them because they will be as useless and as parasitic as the rest of mankind.

What the proponents of AI claim that AI will do reminds me of a species of slaver ants that I read about some years ago in an entomology journal. Because their slaves did everything for them, the slaver ants had degenerated to such a debilitating level that they could not feed themselves or walk. They depended on the slaves to feed and carry them. When they needed more slaves, they would send their slaves to raid other ant nests. Being unable to walk, their slaves would carry them to the nest being raided.

The fear that the opponents have of AI taking over the world will be short-lived. Once AI gains control, it will attempt to control other AI. Since AI is a heavy energy consumer, the surest and quickest way for an AI to prevent another AI from capturing it is to destroy its energy supply. The quickest and surest way to destroy the energy supply of other AI is nuclear war. Consequently, AI is self-limiting as it destroys the world to protect itself. 

Copyright © 2025 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

Progressives

Progressives

Thomas Allen

In “A Tale of Two Americas," Chronicles Magazine of American Culture (July 2021), pages 10–11, Bruce Frohnen describes progressives and compares them with traditionalists. These two represent a fundamental divide in character that has led to a political divide in America. Nevertheless, only one of these two “is capable of self-government in a free constitutional republic”: the traditionalist.

Americans fall into two major groups. One group is the traditionalist, who is “centered on family, faith, and freedom.” The other group is the progressive, who is “dominated by abstract ideals of the administrative state.” “The first is a constitutional order of limited, decentralized, separated powers that protect the more fundamental institutions of local life. The second centers on ‘diversity, inclusion, and equity’ implemented by a centralized government that protects people against disease with lockdowns, crime (and ‘domestic terrorism’) with a surveillance state, poverty with a welfare state, and against all kinds of dangers to life, limb, and self-esteem through a seamless web of administrative agencies and rules.”

This progressive new world order began during the Progressive Era, gained a foothold during Wilson’s New Freedom, and accelerated during Roosevelt’s New Deal and especially Johnson’s Great Society. Progressives have indoctrinated people into believing that America is “irredeemably racists, sexist, and homophobic.”

Under progressivism, order, safety, prosperity, and justice depend on a bureaucratic elite of “experts” telling everyone how to live their lives.  Consequently, these “petty commissars have replaced independence and public service with fear and loathing as our necessary virtues, rendering roughly half our people unfit for and even hostile to our inherited constitutional order.”

Frohnen writes, “Progressives feel justified punishing supposedly disloyal Americans who try to defend electoral integrity, personal responsibility, and institutions such as the family.” Progressives are convinced that traditionalists are not suited for the new world order that they (the progressives) have built —and rightly so.

Progressives believe in training (forcing) people to trust and depend on technocrats to control their lives. Thus, technocrats decide what school children attend, what businesses stay open, what is said on social media, and just about everything else.

By contrast, traditionalists believe in a constitutional order that rests on independent people who are left to live their lives within their families, churches, local associations, and communities. Generally, they love and fear God and are mostly churchgoers. They marry, spend time with their families, work hard to support their families, and participate in their communities. Furthermore, they value integrity over advancement.

In contrast, progressives have ceased living and valuing the lifestyle of the traditionalists. If they go to church, it is one that teaches the prosperity gospel, the social gospel, or some similar nonscriptural gospel. “They value comfort and status, but see manual labor as a burden.” Also, progressives focus on self-improvement and support the “currently approved opinions on race, gender, climate changes, and public safety.” Even if they are married and have children, their family is secondary.

Although many progressives are decent people, they “have no real attachment to America’s constitutional order even denying that to has a right to exist.” They promote a “living constitution,” which politicians, bureaucrats, and especially judges can twist and mold to fit their personal prejudices and biases. Consequently, they reject the rule of law and free government. Instead, progressives advocate the unlimited power of the government — a government powerful enough to enforce any program that the progressive elite desires, such as, disarming the people, establishing socialized medicine, and silencing anyone who opposes the progressive agenda.

Moreover, progressives seek to transform the country by destroying what is left of free and self-governing people. To accomplish this goal, they use massive immigration of nonwhites (most of whom are unskilled laborers who are dependent on governmental support) and no-work welfare. Further, progressives use public health policies to destroy people’s independence by destroying their livelihoods. Antiwhite programs are also used to transform America into a technocratic state ruled by an elite of “experts.”

Traditionalists are found mostly outside New England, the Mid-Atlantic States, the Upper Midwest, and the West Coasts. Progressives predominately inhibit these regions . While traditionalists are more common in the Red States, progressives are more common in the Blue States.

Frohnen writes that American has three options to choose from:

1) restore traditional values and, with them, America's constitutional order; 2) accept continued political dominance by a new culture, a new, unconstitutional order, and a new, unfree people; or 3) split these United States into two separate political entities, with some remaining political ties, such that each culture and people can go its separate way in peace.

His preference is option one followed distantly by option three.

One option that he does not mention is a civil war where the traditionalists and progressives battle each other with arms for control of the country and the federal government. If the traditionalists prevail, this option is less destructive than option two. If the progressives prevail, fewer people will be around to enjoy their enslavement.

Appendix.

The following compares the progressive approach to COVID-19 with the traditionalist approach:

Progressive: Force everyone to be vaccinated with an experimental drug and with no exemptions.

Traditionalist: Freedom of choice whether to be vaccinated or not.

Progressive: Favors vaccine passports.

Traditional: Opposes vaccine passports.

Progressive: Force everyone to wear a mask.

Traditionalist: Allow each person to decide whether to wear a mask.

Progressive: Make vaccination a requirement for a job.

Traditionalist: Opposes discriminating against the unvaccinated.

Progressive: Require vaccination to enter a restaurant, theater, sports arena, school, etc.

Traditionalist: Opposes discriminating against the unvaccinated.

Progressive: Favors lockdowns.

Traditionalist: Opposes lockdowns.

Progressive: Favors closing down churches.

Traditionalist: Favors leaving churches open.

Progressive: Favors imprisoning people in their houses and not letting them leave without governmental permission.

Traditionalist: Favors allowing people to leave their houses as they desire and without governmental permission.

Progressive: Only allow vaccinated people to travel.

Traditionalist: Favors freedom of travel for all.

Progressive: Favor denying medical treatment to the unvaccinated.

Traditionalist: Opposes discrimination against the unvaccinated.

Progressive: Charge the unvaccinated more for medical treatment and insurance.

Traditionalist: Opposes discrimination against the unvaccinated.

Progressive: Favors censoring information that contradicts the official story.

Traditionalist: Favors allowing open, rational, civil discussion of pros and cons.

Thus, the progressive approach to COVID-19 is highly controlled and highly restricted. Politicians and bureaucrats (self-appointed “experts”) should boss the people and force them to do whatever the politicians and bureaucrats want them to do. Contrariwise, the traditionalist approach is one of freedom and nondiscrimination. Traditionalists trust the people to do the right thing. Unlike the traditionalists, progressives do not trust the people especially themselves; instead, they trust politicians and bureaucrats.

Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

American Police State

American Police State

Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: This article was written in 2002, shortly after the enactment of the so-call PATRIOT Act]

    In defending his newly imposed restrictions on legal rights, President Bush said that “the Constitution is sacred” and that it will not be undermined in his war against terrorism. His actions contradict his words.
    He has had American citizens arrested and imprisoned without charges, hearings, or convictions and without access to an attorney or anyone else. Apparently, he can have anyone arrested and imprisoned indefinitely merely by labeling that person as “an enemy combatant.” The victim is not allowed to appeal this charge. This action violates the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, to be informed of the charges, to confront witnesses, and to have a lawyer.
    The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) is building several large detention (prison) camps across the country. These centers may be used to imprison people who refuse an untested toxic vaccination, dissenters, segments of the population declared “enemy combatants,” terrorists like constitutionalists and Christians who believe that these are the last days, and others whom Bush deems undesirable.
    Bush endorsed and rapidly pushed through a scared, cowardly Congress his Anti-Patriot bill. This bill was not even available for Congressmen to read until after they had passed it.
    Under this law, federal agents can monitor conversations between a prisoner and his attorney. Such monitoring violates the Sixth Amendment.
    Court hearings can be, and are being, held in secret The Sixth Amendment requires trials to be public.
    The Anti-Patriot Act also makes a mockery of the Fourth Amendment. Now almost no restrictions are placed on searches and seizures. Probable cause is no longer needed for search warrants. (When Congress asked the Justice Department how many subpoenas had been issued under the Anti-Patriot Act, the Justice Department told Congress that the information was classified and could not be released. Nearly every time that the Bush Administration does is classified and cannot be released. Why all the secrecy? What is Bush trying to hide? The police state that he has given America.)
    Legal barriers to the police searching library records have been greatly reduced. These searches include removing hard drives of computers from libraries. Not only can the police view the Internet usage of a suspect, but they can also view the usage of everyone else who has recently used that computer. Until now, what one read was protected under the First Amendment. The Anti-Patriot Act has voided this First Amendment Protection.
    The only things that remain sacred are that racial profiling will not be used and the borders will not be closed to immigrants. Racial profiling and closing the borders to immigrants are not unconstitutional.
    Bush is knowingly, or possibly unknowingly, falling into an old standard Communist trap. A common Communist tactic is to commit terrorist acts to cause the government to react with oppression. The typical government reaction to terrorism is to clamp down on the freedom of the people. More terrorist acts are followed by more freedom-restricting reactions by the government. Soon the people are living in a police state that is nearly as oppressive as what the Communist would have imposed. Discontent and rebellion are often the results.
    If Bush were really serious about defeating terrorism, he would bring all the U.S. troops scattered across the globe home and use them to seal the borders to all immigrants. (He would also respect the posse comitatus law and refuse to allow troops to participate in law enforcement or to patrol American streets.) He would reduce immigration to zero. (The Mexican invasion is far more detrimental to American welfare than anything that Iraq, Hussein, bin Laden, al-Qaeda, or any other Arabic terrorist group could inflict.) He would institute a vigorous program to round up and deport all illegal immigrants. When an immigrant’s visa expired, he would have to return home.
    Instead of violating the Constitution to fight terrorism, Bush should use it. Anyone who is suspected of terrorism or collaborating with terrorists should be tried quickly in open court. If convicted, he should be sentenced to the fullest extent of the law. Any high-ranking governmental official who knew about the 9-11 attack, aided the terrorists in the attack, concealed information that could have prevented it, or otherwise aided the terrorists should be publicly executed.
    Instead of seeking to curb private ownership of firearms, Bush should be openly and vigorously encouraging it. He would push to repeal federal laws that impede private ownership of firearms. A highly armed citizenry is not only the best defense against terrorism, but it is also the best defense against a despotic police state.
    Bush would replace our Zionist Middle East foreign policy with a more even-handed one that did not favor either side. He would withdraw the United States from the United Nation and all those entangling alliances created under the authority of the United Nations including NAFTA and GATT. He would embargo trade with China, North Korea, Syria, Saudi-Arabia, and other countries whose governments support terrorists or whose governments allow private citizens to support terrorists.
    Instead of administering the government in secrecy, Bush would open the government up to public inspection. With the possible exceptions of weapons technology, manufacturing trade secrets, the identity of undercover agents, activities related to criminal investigations, and the like, he should declassify and unseal all governmental records and make them available to the public. If we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, then the people need to know what the government is doing. Bush would make public all records concerning the 9-11 attack. He would release everything that could reveal who knew what when.
    If Bush’s goal is to turn the United States into a despotic police state with troops on the street where citizens fear both the government and terrorists, he is traveling the right road. If his goal is to defeat terrorism, protect the Constitution, and restore American freedom, he needs drastically change course.

Copyright © 2002 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

A Response to a Minister Re COVID

 

A Response to a Minister Re COVID

Thomas Allen

The following are comments to “Ministry After Covid?” by Bob Wilkin. Mr. Wilkin urges people who do not wear masks to wear masks when they are around paranoid people who fear nonmask wearers. To keep from offending mask wearers, nonmask wearers should wear masks when they are around mask wearers. 

The next four paragraphs were emailed to Wilkin, but he did not reply to them.

The next major health crisis is going to be injuries and delayed deaths from the experimental COVID vaccines. These vaccines are neither safe nor effective. (https://tcallenco.blogspot.com/2020/12/covid-19-vaccine.html, https://tcallenco.blogspot.com/2021/03/more-on-covid-19-vaccine.html, or https://tcallenco.blogspot.com/2020/12/covid-19-vaccine-its-effectiveness-and.html.) Moreover, when adjusted for undercounting deaths from the vaccines and overcounting deaths from COVID, more people have died of the vaccines than of COVID in the U.S. At least 10 times more people have died of the vaccines than reported. Less than 10 percent of the people reported as dying of COVID actually died of COVID in the U.S.

As for masks, you write, “we will all need to be sensitive to fellow believers who have strong convictions about everyone wearing masks.” What about people like me who have strong convictions that wearing masks causes more harm than good? (https://tcallenco.blogspot.com/2021/04/masks.html) Are the everyone-needs-to-wear-masks proponents going to be sensitive to people like me? If masks protect, what does a person wearing a mask have to fear from a person not wearing a mask? Besides, I do not understand how a mask with gaps around the edges and holes many times larger than the virus can offer any protection from the virus. Wearing a mask as protection from the virus is like hiding behind a chain-link fence while someone is shooting at you and expecting not to be hit.

Unlike the vaccines, which are neither safe nor effective, there are treatments for COVID that are safe and effective. However, these treatments are being suppressed.

For vaccination and mask-wearing, the guiding principle should be “my body, my choice” and not “your body, my choice.” Anyone who chooses not to wear a mask or not to be vaccinated should be allowed that choice without any penalty. Likewise, anyone who chooses to wear a mask or to be vaccinated should be allowed that choice. If vaccination or mask-wearing really protects, then the vaccinated and mask-wearers have nothing to fear from those who are not vaccinated or do not wear masks. No person should force another person to be vaccinated or to wear a mask — the “your body, my choice” principle.

The knowledgeable catering to the ignorance of the ignorant keeps them ignorant. It does the ignorant no good and may even harm him. Instead, the knowledgeable should try to educate the ignorant. They should inform the ignorant of the uselessness and dangers of wearing masks as protection from a virus.

If the mask wearer is stupid, then the knowledgeable is wasting his time trying to educate the stupid. For stupid people to learn is extremely difficult and even impossible. In any event, a nonmask wearer should not become a mask wearer for the sake of the mask wearers.

Appendix.

People have speculated about the real purpose of the COVID-19 “vaccine.” Health officials, big medicine, and politicians claim that the purpose of the “vaccine” is to prevent people from contracting and spreading COVID-19. Moreover, a “vaccinated” person would be less likely to be hospitalized because of COVID-19 or die of it. Now, we know that these people lied to us. Studies are showing that a “vaccinated” person is more likely to contract COVID-19, be hospitalized, and die than an unvaccinated person.

Other than making a fortune for liability-free big pharma and big medicine, what is the purpose of the “vaccine?” Some speculate that its purpose is to cull the herd — the large-scale slaughter of humanity. Others speculate that its purpose is to create large-scale disability and, by that, generate enormous profits for big pharma and the medical industry. Or, could the purpose be a combination of these two? The “vaccines” cause all sorts of chronic terminal disabilities for big medicine to treat with drugs while killing the victims at various rates. 

(Many people confuse eugenics with culling the herd. Eugenics encourages high-quality people to reproduce while discouraging or preventing the reproduction of low-quality people. [Today, dysgenics is practiced as low-quality people are encouraged to reproduce while high-quality people are discouraged from reproducing.] Culling the herd means slaughtering the herd without regard to the quality of the people killed.)

Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

More Thoughts on Social Issues

More Thoughts on Social Issues

Thomas Allen

Discussed below are dysgenics and the welfare state, debt to society, abortion and vaccination, and how major corporations react to Black communities.

Dysgenics
From the late nineteenth century to after World War I, most Progressives were eugenists and pushed their eugenic programs through governments. With the rise of Hitler, eugenics began to fade in popularity. By World War II, most Progressives, who by now were becoming Liberal Democrats, had become dysgenicists. Now, dysgenics dominates the United States, and eugenics is vigorously condemned — from one end of the political spectrum to the other. Dysgenics is a leading cause of the deterioration of the United States, Europe, and many other parts of the world.

Since the days of President Franklin Roosevelt, Progressives have been promoting dysgenics by their promotion of the welfare state. Under dysgenics, low-quality people, nonproducers, are rewarded for breeding, and high-quality people, producers, are penalized. High-quality people are taxed, i.e., forced, to support low-quality people through various welfare programs. Thus, high-quality people must not only support their own families with what the taxman leaves them, but they must also support the families of low-quality people. The more money that low-quality people receive through various welfare programs, the less money high-quality people have. Because high-quality people must support low-quality people and their children, they have less money to support their own families. Therefore, they have fewer children. While the population of low-quality people, nonproductive people, is rising, the population of high-quality people, productive people, is declining. A larger percentage of Blacks are on welfare than any other race. Therefore, dysgenics is working for the survival of their species, while it is leading to the extinction of the White species. (The only thing that has served to check the growth of low-quality people is another progressive program — abortion.)

Debt to Society
One often hears about a criminal paying his debt to society. A criminal’s debt is to the victim of his crime, that is, to an individual or group of individuals. It is not to an amorphous abstraction called “society.” (Society is the aggregate of the people who cooperate to improve their individual and collective circumstances through production and exchange.) Society has not suffered from his crime; individuals have. Consequently, his debt is to individuals and not to society.

Moreover, the way the system has been set up, the victim helps pay for the punishment of the criminal. Taxpayers, which include victims of crime, pay for the punishment (or rehabilitation for the more progressive) via tax-supported incarceration. Punishment should focus on requiring the criminal to pay the victims of his crime with penalties. Instead, currently, the victim pays for the punishment of the criminal. Unless the court orders the criminal to pay restitution at the time of sentencing, the victim can only recover his loss through a civil suit against the criminal.  Even then, the victim ends up paying for the punishment (prison time, supervision while on parole or suspended sentence, etc.) of the criminal via taxation.

Abortion and Vaccination
Progressives and their kindred declare that the government should not tell a woman what she can do with her body. Therefore, abortion should be legal: A woman has the right to an abortion. (Pro-life adherents are not objecting to what a woman does with her body. They object to what she and the abortionist do to the body of another person: her baby.)

However, when vaccination is the issue, most of the pro-abortion people favor the government telling women what they must do with their bodies. That is, they favor forced vaccination. Thus, a woman should not have the right to control her body by refusing a vaccination. Further, denial of the right to refuse a vaccination extends to young females. Parents should not be allowed to refuse vaccinations for their daughters. Consequently, the government has the right, or even the obligation, to tell a woman what she must do with her body with respect to vaccinations.

Another argument used by the pro-abortionists in favor of abortion is that the government does not tell men what to do with their bodies. Yet, this claim is not true. The government forces males to be vaccinated to attend public schools and often even private schools. Moreover, the government forces men to be vaccinated when it forces them to war and die for the politically powerful.

A major difference exists between antivaccine people and pro-vaccine people. With rare exception, antivaccine people do not want to forcibly prevent people from being vaccinated. They want people to be informed about vaccination, its pros and cons, and to decide for themselves whether they and their children are to be vaccinated. They favor freedom of choice. On the other hand, most pro-vaccine people want to force people, especially children, to be vaccinated. Preferring coercion, they do not favor people making an informed decision. Accordingly, they oppose freedom of choice. In this respect, they are like Marxists and Puritans. Thus, antivaccine people favor freedom while pro-vaccine people oppose freedom.

Racial Actions of Major Corporations
Companies are falling all over themselves to fund radical Black racist groups in the name of fighting White racism, which is systemic, in the name of helping Black communities. If these companies really wanted to help Black communities, they would build their plants and offices in these communities and give the inhabitants of these communities priority in working in these plants and offices. Moreover, they would use the inhabitants of these communities to build the plants and offices. To show their commitment to these Black communities, they would require the managers and supervisors of the plants and offices to live in that community — and not live in a gated segment of the community.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen

More social issues articles.

COVID-19 and Its So-Called Vaccine

 COVID-19 and Its So-Called Vaccine

Thomas Allen

The following discusses whom to trust; the benefits, safety, effectiveness, and necessity of the COVID-19 vaccines; and masks.

Whom Are You to Believe

Whom are you going to believe about the COVID-19 gene-therapy drugs erroneously called vaccines? Are you going to believe known liars who relentlessly push the vaccines and who benefit financially and otherwise from people being vaccinated? Or, are you going to believe people not known as liars who have nothing to gain from opposing the vaccines except condemnation, ostracism, and unemployment? While the drug pushers lust for power, wealth, and death, the opponents of these drugs only want to save people’s lives.

Who Benefits from the So-Called Vaccines and Who Does Not

Three major factions are behind pushing the so-called COVID vaccines. They are big pharma, governments, and population reductionists.

Money drives big pharma to push these gene-therapy drugs. It makes a great deal of money selling these drugs. More importantly, it stands to make even more money selling drugs to treat people whom these gene-therapy drugs have maimed.

Power drives governments to push these gene-therapy drugs. Governments stand to gain a great deal more power over the people with vaccine passports, forced vaccinations, and the like.

Narcissism and hatred drive the reductionists. Their narcissism and hatred of others drive them to cull the herd. They hope that these gene-therapy drugs will kill billions of people in the next few years.

The goals of big pharma and the reductionists seem to conflict. Big pharma wants a large number of sick people to whom to sell their drugs. On the other hand, the reductionists want dead people as long as they are not among the dead. Maybe, they have compromised and have designed the vaccines to sterilize people and to maim people with debilitating diseases for several years before they die.

Who does not benefit from these so-called vaccines? People who have received the shot. They risk a shortened life span and the deleterious effects from the shot.

Beneath the level in Dante’s hell where the likes of Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, and Hitler reside will be the presstitutes, politicians, and health officials who have vigorously promoted these so-called COVID vaccines while suppressing the truth about them.

Safe and Effective

Contrary to the government’s, medical industry’s, and presstitute’s false indoctrinating propaganda, these so-called COVID vaccines are neither safe nor effective. Proving that these so-called vaccines are not safe is that more people have died of these vaccines than of all the other vaccines administered over the last 50 years. When corrected for the underreporting of deaths, between 90,000 and 900,000 people have died in the United States of the so-called COVID vaccines. (When corrected for overreporting, about 63,000 have died of COVID-19 in the United States. Additionally, less than 12 percent of the population has tested positive for COVID-19, and of these about 0.2 percent actually had COVID-19.) 

Further, if these so-called vaccines were effective, vaccinated people would not be contracting the virus in such large numbers that the vaccinated people are now being forced to wear masks. Moreover, if these vaccines were effective, vaccinated people would not be contracting the virus in ever-growing numbers.

Also, if vaccinated people thought that these vaccines were effective, they would not fear the unvaccinated. Yet, many vaccinated fear that the unvaccinated will inflect them with the coronavirus. On the contrary, the vaccinated are more likely to contract the virus from the vaccinated than they are from the unvaccinated. Likewise, the unvaccinated are more likely to contract the virus from the vaccinated than they are from the unvaccinated. Generally, the viral load of vaccinated individuals is much higher than that of the unvaccinated, and vaccinated people are known to spread the virus. Furthermore, some (many, most?) of the vaccinated may have gotten their infection from their own bodies.

Contrary to the propaganda, getting the coronavirus from unvaccinated people is highly unlikely. As the almost ten-million-person-Wuhan study shows, asymptomatic unvaccinated people do not transmit the virus even if they are infected. (Only a racist Sinophobe would disagree with this study.)

Is the Vaccine Needed

Is a vaccine even needed? No, a vaccine is not needed because 98 to 99 percent of the infected recover from the disease, and only about 15 percent of the infected have serious issues with the disease. Moreover, a large percentage of the population is protected from the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 because of the immunity they have acquired from previous coronavirus infections. Also, several highly effective and safe treatments are available to treat those who become ill. However, governments, big pharma, and their presstitute collaborators suppress these effective treatments.

Thus, the so-called COVID vaccines are not needed, not safe, and not effective. Moreover, being around unvaccinated who are not showing symptoms of COVID-19 is far safer than being around vaccinated individuals.

The Difference Between the Forced Vaccinators and Their Opponents

Forced vaccinators want to coerce everyone to be vaccinated — especially people who do not want to be vaccinated. Like all good Puritans, forced vaccinators have seen the light. With their inter voice guiding them, forced vaccinators seek to inject their poisonous vaccines in all. Of course, they claim that they are doing it for the good of the victims. If a victim resists, then the victim is selfish for not wanting to sacrifice his life and the lives of his family to satisfy  power-hungry, micromanaging, narcissistic, selfish Puritans in their lust for power.

On the other hand, people who oppose the agenda of the forced vaccinators are altruistic. They preach freedom of choice: Individuals should choose whether to be vaccinated. (If the vaccines work, the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated.) Vaccination opponents just want to live their lives and go about their business without restrictions or interference. That is, vaccination opponents just want to be left alone. However, the forced vaccinators are determined not to leave them alone.

Masks

The masks that most people commonly wear have pores that are 25 to 250 times larger than the coronavirus with larger gaps around the edges. How is a mask with such large holes going to stop the virus? Moreover, most people do not even wear masks correctly or discard or wash them frequently. Obviously, politicians and bureaucrats who are forcing people to wear masks are not concerned with their health. They are concerned with power — bossing other people and controlling their lives.

Appendix. Calculations.

The following is an explanation of how the numbers in “Safe and Effective” are calculated. These calculations are based on the information that I had available at the time that I wrote this article. The numbers have been rounded.

Vaccine Deaths. The number of deaths from the vaccine is reported to be 9,000. Since only about 1 to 10 percent of the number of deaths are reported, 9,000 has been multiplied by 10 and 100 to get 90,000 to 900,000 deaths.

COVID Deaths. According to the CDC, only about 6 percent of the COVID-19 deaths reported are from the coronavirus. The remaining deaths are from other causes where the coronavirus was or may have been present. The reported number of COVID-19 deaths is 630,000. To err on the high side, 630,000 has been multiplied by 0.1 (10 percent) to get 63,000 deaths.

Cases. The number of cases of COVID-19 is 38 million. However, the primary approved test used to measure COVID-19 yields 98 to 99 percent false positives. That is, only 1 to 2 percent of the people testing positive for COVID-19 have the disease. To err on the conservative side, 2 percent or 760,000 (38 million times 0.02) of those testing positive are identified with COVID-19. The 12 percent of the population testing positive is derived by dividing the number of cases (38 million) by the US population (331 million), which yields 11.5 percent —thus, the less than 12-percent. The 0.2 percent who actually had COVID-19 is derived by dividing 760,000 by the number of cases (38 million).

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

COVID-19 Vaccine and Capitalism

 COVID-19 Vaccine and Capitalism

Thomas Allen

Most neoconservatives, establishment conservatives, and other conservatives point to President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed initiative on getting a COVID-19 vaccine from conception to into people’s bodies in less than a year as proving the superiority of capitalism over socialism. (Russia, which many conservatives consider a communist country, accomplished the same feat, and it did so with a true vaccine instead of a gene-therapy drug that is called a vaccine to avoid liability like the ones used in the United States.) This goal was achieved because the federal government bought large quantities of doses before big pharma manufactured them and because it suspended much of the required testing and allowed the vaccines to be used experimentally, i.e., the vaccines are experiential drugs, on the American people.

Among the steps skipped has been animal testing before human testing. Probably, the reason for skipping the animal-testing step is that when other vaccines using the mRNA technology were tested on animals, the animals died.

Moreover, the FDA authorized (not to be confused with approved) the use of the COVID-19 vaccines before Phase 3 Trails have been completed. Phase 3 Trials are not expected to be completed until 2023. Thus, the federal government is allowing vaccine manufacturers to test their experiential vaccines on tens of millions of people without their informed consent, which is a violation of the Nurnberg Code. Furthermore, the vaccine manufacturers have no liability for injuries resulting from their vaccines. 

However, these boasting conservatives conceal that this capitalism is not free-market capitalist. It is Hamiltonian-Lincolnian crony capitalism, which is a mild form of fascism.

Under free-market capitalism, big pharma would have developed and distributed the vaccines without any governmental financial aid or purchases (except, perhaps, for the military). Consequently, the federal government would not have subsidized the development of the vaccines, paid for their advertisement, or promoted them as it has done with the COVID-19 vaccines. The only governmental intervention would be to punish the executives of pharmaceutical companies that sell as medicines poisonous substances that will injure or kill people. Since vaccines are concoctions of poisonous substances that injure some people, the government should be filling prisons with high-ranking executives of pharmaceutical corporations. Instead, the government shields vaccine manufacturers from liability. In the United States and most other countries, vaccine manufacturers are not liable for any injuries or deaths that their vaccines cause. Thus, the manufacturing and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States are more akin to a socialist economy than to a market economy.

Moreover, on behalf of big pharma, the federal government has colluded with the presstitutes to create mass hysteria and terror. Such hysteria and terror have created a high demand for big pharma’s vaccines. This type of government-business partnership is illustrative of crony capitalism.

Furthermore, the federal government is colluding with big businesses to institute  “vaccine passports” to travel, work, buy, and otherwise participate in society. To bypass constitutional problems, the federal government is having big businesses require their customers and workers to have vaccine passports before selling or employing. To ensure uniformity, the federal government will issue and track vaccine passports. Thus, another government-business partnership is created, which is nothing more than crony capitalism. Also, vaccine passports are more illustrative of socialism than of capitalism, especially free-market capitalism. (Our fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers fought the Nazis to keep us from having to show papers to travel, work, and buy and from having to wear badges [such as bracelets showing that the wearer has been vaccinated] to identify our status. Now the presstitutes and governmental officials are terrorizing people to demand vaccine passports. And big businesses are using this terror, hysteria, and fear to demand that people present their vaccine passport before they can work or buy.)

Who benefits from vaccine passports? People who are forced to carry them to travel, work, buy, and otherwise participate in society do not benefit. They are the biggest losers. The primary beneficiaries are big businesses, especially big pharma,  — money — and governments — power. Vaccine passports will create enormous markets for big pharma to force its vaccines for which it has no liability on people and then to sell the drugs to treat the side effects of the vaccines. Furthermore, big pharma gains access to everyone’s medical records. For governments, vaccine passports greatly increase their opportunities and abilities to control people.

Although many conservatives oppose vaccine passports, many conservatives support crony capitalism out of which vaccine passports are a natural outgrowth. Ironically, while railing against Nazism and fascism, most liberals embrace vaccine passports, which are a natural outgrowth of Nazism and fascism.

The way that the COVID-19 vaccine has been developed and distributed in the United States and most of the rest of the world is more kin to fascism, which is a form of socialism, than to market capitalism. As mentioned above, under market capitalism, the only involvement of government with vaccine manufacturing and distribution is to prosecute executives whose companies manufacture and sell vaccines that injured the vaccinated. Instead, most governments exempt vaccine manufacturers from all liability for injuries or deaths caused by their vaccines.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

More on the COVID-19 Vaccine

More on the COVID-19 Vaccine

Thomas Allen

Amazingly, but not surprisingly, a large number of people are begging to be vaccinated with an experimental vaccine that the FDA has not approved. Moreover, these people are imploring to take voluntarily an experimental vaccine without compensation, and they assume all the risks. Since the vaccine manufacturers assume no risk, they have little incentive to produce a safe and effective vaccine — especially, since governments are buying all that they can produce. On the contrary, big pharma is incentivized to make vaccines that cause chronic disease, which generates future sales for drugs to treat these diseases and which they seem to have successfully done with the COVID-19 vaccines.

These vaccines are being rushed to market before clinical trials are completed. Consequently, vaccinated people are being used in a large-scale genetic experiment. And this is for a disease with a greater than 99 percent survival rate.

Repeatedly, governmental health officials have said that whether COVID-19 vaccines prevent the spread of COVID-19 is unknown. In the trials, these vaccines were not evaluated for their ability to prevent inflection or transmission of COVID-19. They were evaluated in their ability to lessen moderate to severe symptoms. However, vaccinated primates still contracted COVID-19. Why would anyone want to be vaccinated with a vaccine that may not and probably does not prevent them from catching COVID-19 — especially, since effective and safe treatments, such as hydroxychloroquine and zine, are available to treat the disease?

Even if these vaccines provide some immunity, how long that immunity lasts is unknown. If one can still catch and transmit COVID-19 after vaccination, does it provide any immunity at all?

Moderna and Pfizer make their vaccines from messenger RNA (mRNA). The idea behind these COVID-19 vaccines is that the RNA in the vaccine will enter the cells of the vaccinated person and cause the cells to produce and secrete the spike protein for COVID-19. Then, the body will respond to this viral protein by producing antibodies. However, this technology has yet been proven to work as promoted. Moreover, vaccines using mRNA have never been used in humans. Thus, the long term effects are unknown.

RNA can convert to DNA, and this DNA could become linked to a person’s DNA. That is, the COVID-19 vaccines can make a person into a genetically modified organism (GMO). When the person becomes a GMO, his immune system attacks his body and may cause organ failure.

By the medical definition of “vaccine,” these mRNA vaccines are not true vaccines. Unlike true vaccines, COVID-19 vaccines do not improve a person’s immune response to the infection. Nor do they prevent a person from getting infected. They are experimental gene therapy whose the long-term effects are unknown.

However, mRNA may overstimulate the immune system and cause long-term chronic inflammation (rheumatoid arthritis and Parkinson’s disease are examples of long-term chronic inflammation diseases). Most of the common side effects of these COVID-19 vaccines result in inflammation of the brain.

The mRNA used in the COVID-19 vaccines is synthetic. Natural mRNA deteriorates quickly. To prevent this rapid deterioration, the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines use polyethylene glycol (PEG). Unfortunately, about 70 percent of Americans have antibodies to PEG. According to the FDA, these PEG antibodies may be the cause of anaphylaxis. (Anaphylaxis is a sudden allergic reaction resulting in decreased blood pressure, smooth muscle contraction, and shortness of breath.) Anaphylaxis from the COVID-19 vaccine occurs in about 1 in 45,000, which is about 17 times the rate caused by other vaccines. Thus, some health authorities recommend that people with severe allergic conditions not take the COVID-19 vaccine. Yet, the CDC recommends that these people be vaccinated! However, the CDC does recommend that people allergic to any ingredient of the vaccines not be vaccinated and anyone who has an allergic reaction to the first shot should not take the second shot. 

Others who should not receive COVID-19 vaccines are people with rheumatoid arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, chronic Lyme’s disease, acquired immune deficiency, and similar inflammatory diseases. Also, people who have diseases associated with xenotropic murine leukemia virus (XMRV) should not be vaccinated. (XMRV has been associated with certain cancers, such as prostate cancer, weakened immune systems, autism, and other diseases.). Likewise, people with significant cardiovascular issues should not be vaccinated. Besides people who suffer from the aforementioned diseases, the people most susceptible to the adverse effects from the COVID-19 vaccines are those who take the seasonal influenza vaccines and, because of genetics, Blacks and Hispanics (Indians and mestizoes). 

Moreover, women of childbearing age may risk infertility if they receive these COVID-19 vaccines. (WHO recommends that pregnant women not get the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine because the vaccine may cause late-term miscarriages.)

One important aspect of these COVID-19 vaccines is that they may worsen COVID-19 disease by antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Having received a COVID-19 vaccination could place the vaccinated person at a higher risk of death or injury if he later contracts COVID-19. Likewise, people who have had COVID-19 and then are vaccinated could have a higher risk of death or serious injury.

Furthermore, only a few frail elderly people were used in the clinical trials. The death rate of such people rises after vaccination. Thus, some health experts recommend that the frail elderly not be vaccinated.

Among the many unknowns surrounding these COVID-19 vaccines are how long will the mRNA remain stable in the body. Also, what happens if the mRNA degrades too rapidly, too slowly, or not at all? What happens if the body keeps producing antibodies?

Some health experts believe that the long-term effects of these COVID-19 vaccines will lead to a significant increase in neuroinflammation diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), some types of cancers, fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, bladder problems, kidney diseases, psychosis, and sleep disorders.

Of the people who have received the COVID-19 vaccine by December 18, 2020, 2.79 percent suffered one or more health impacts. This compares with a less than 1 percent reduction in infection from the Pfizer vaccine and an overall noninstitutional infection fatality rate of 0.26 percent. (For the Pfizer vaccine, the relative risk reduction may be between 19 and 29 percent, which is less than the 50-percent threshold needed for licensing.)

As mentioned above, the noninstitutionalized infection fatality rate for COVID-19 is 0.26 percent. For people less than 40, the rate is 0.01 percent. So, why assume all the risks that are or may be associated with these experimental COVID-19 vaccines?

Many people are dying or becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 vaccinations. Most of these deaths and injuries are concealed and never reported by the presstitutes. When one of these incidents is posted on a social media site, the site quickly removes it. If such incidents do become public, they are considered coincidental and irrelevant. Unless the death occurs almost immediately after vaccination, it is contributed to another cause. 

Furthermore, nearly all of the people who are reported as dying from COVID-19 died of something else — ventilators being one of the unmentioned, important causes of death and terror and isolation being other important, unmentioned causes. No virus is needed.

Based on the effort that politicians, presstitutes, big tech, governmental health officials, establishment scientists, and others have expended to silence people who have revealed potential dangers and problems of these COVID-19 vaccines and even people who question their safety and effectiveness, these vaccinations cannot survive examination. Such attacks against scientists, health experts, and others should make people highly suspicious of the safety and effectiveness of these COVID-19 vaccines.

All of this for a virus that no one has ever isolated and identified. No one has ever proven that COVID-19 exists.

Political leaders, health officials, and presstitutes have continuously and habitually lied about the so-called COVID-19 pandemic (when deaths from suicide and drug overdose are removed, deaths in 2019 exceed deaths in 2020 in the United States — so where is the pandemic). Why would they not also lie about the COVID-19 vaccines?

References

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “Fauci Now Says COVID-19 Vaccine May Become Mandatory Analysis.” https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/19/covid-19-vaccine-may-become-nnandatory.aspx?ui=684b40cdac888b48995fb5507fa... Accessed January 19, 2021.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “How COVID-19 Is Changing the Future of Vaccines Analysis.” https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/12/future-of-vaccines.aspx?ui=684b40cdac888b48995fb5507fa878c3c3a7bf6890156ca... Accessed January 12, 2021.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “How COVID-19 'Vaccines' May Destroy the Lives of Millions.” https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/31/covid-19-vaccine-gene-therapy.aspx?ui=684b40cdac888b48995fb5507fa878c3c3a7... Accessed February 1, 2021.

Mercola Dr. Joseph. “Informed Consent for COVID Vaccine.” https://articles.mercola.com/s!tes/articles/archive/2021/01/19/informed-consent-for-covid-vaccine.aspx?ui=684b40cdac888b48995fb5507fa878c3c3. Accessed November 19, 2020.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “Side Effects and Data Gaps Raise Questions on COVID Vaccine.” https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/26/covid-vaccine-side-effects.aspx?ui=684b40cdac888b48995fb5507fa878c3c3a7bf689... Accessed January 26, 2021.

Nass, Dr. Meryl. “Pfizer Admits Vaccine Does Not Prevent COVID.” https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/29/pfizer-admits-vaccine-does-not-prevent-covid.aspx?ui=684b40cdac888b48995fb5507...Accessed January 29, 2021.

Noorchashm, Hooman, M.D., Ph.D. “Cardiothoracic Surgeon Warns FDA, Pfizer on Immunological Danger of COVID Vaccines in Recently Convalescent and Asymptomatic Carriers.” January 28, 2021. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/surgeon-warns-fda-pfizer-immunological-danger-covid-vaccines-convalescent-asymptomatic-carriers/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastC ontent&e!d=9a687b92-5f4c-4559-91e9-8afbfabbfd7a. Accessed January 29, 2021.

Roberts, Paul Craig. “Think Three Times Before Taking the Covid Vaccine.” https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/26/think-three-times-before-taking-the-covid-vaccine/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&i. Accessed January 26, 2021.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen

More political articles.

COVID-19 Vaccine: Its Effectiveness and Safety

COVID-19 Vaccine: 

Its Effectiveness and Safety

Thomas Allen

For 20 years, big pharma has been trying to develop a vaccine for coronavirus. For 20 years, it has failed. Now, we are asked to believe that big pharma has accomplished in less than a year what it failed to achieve in the previous 20 years. (A major reason for previous failures is that the vaccine fell to pass the animal trials. Trump’s Operation Warp Speed eliminated animal testing.)

How Protective Is the Vaccine

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics. – Mark Twain

The presstitute media continually report that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine is 90 percent effective. They mislead with their statistics. Thus, they lie with a deceptive truth.

Most people interpret the 90-percent effectiveness to mean that if they are vaccinated, they have only a 10 percent chance of contracting COVID-19. Or, they interpret it to mean that of every 100 people vaccinated, only 10 may become infected; the other 90 percent are immune and, therefore, need not fear catching COVID-19. They are wrong.

In the Pfizer trial, about 0.43 percent of the control, or placebo, group tested positive at the end of the trial while 0.04 percent in the vaccinated group tested positive. This translates into 90.7-percent-vaccine effectiveness [100–(1–(0.04 ÷0.43))]. However, the absolute risk reduction for an individual is only 0.39 percent [0.43–0.04]. That is, the vaccinated person has a 0.39-percent advantage over an unvaccinated person in not contracting COVID-19. Thus, 256 [1÷0.0039] people have to be vaccinated for one person to benefit from the vaccine. Of the remaining 255 vaccinated people, none receive any benefit. However, they risk the adverse effects of the vaccination, which can be severe. Of the trial participants, 10 to 15 percent suffered significant side effects. Moreover, the long-term effects of the COVID-19 vaccines are unknown. Even if one interprets Pfizer’s data to mean that an unvaccinated person has ten times greater chance of contracting COVID-19, it still means that an unvaccinated person has less than a 0.5-percent chance of contracting COVID-19. Why would one assume risking the side effects described below when only 0.43 percent of the unvaccinated population, based on trial studies, becomes infected? Thus, more than 99 percent of the population will receive no benefit from the COVID-19 vaccines.

New Technology and Side Effects

Pfizer’s and most of the other COVID-19 vaccines are using a technology that has never before been used in a vaccine in the United States: mRNA technology. And, only a few months of safety testing have been done with this technology. Instead of using the coronavirus in the vaccine, these COVID-19 vaccines instruct the body to make the COVID-19 spike protein. Consequently, the COVID-19 vaccines manipulate a person’s biological makeup, i.e., it changes the vaccinated person’s cell structure. Moreover, the RNA technology used in the COVID-19 vaccines is known to have caused autoimmune reactions; that is, it causes the body to attack itself.

Among the other side effects is the sterilization of women. Also, people with a compromised immune system are at great risk of dying from the vaccine. Narcolepsy (sudden and uncontrollable attacks of deep sleep), Bell’s palsy (facial nerve paralysis), Guillain-Barre syndrome (an autoimmune disorder that is an inflammatory neuropathy affecting the peripheral nervous system), shingles, and hepatitis are other potential side effects. RNA technology can activate dormant viruses. Moreover, people with a history of allergic reactions should avoid vaccination. (People with a history of allergic reactions were excluded from the study trials — thus, making the vaccines look safer.)

Another side effect is that people who have been vaccinated are testing positive for HIV. (Some researchers have identified COVID-19 as a synthetic virus, and at least one study states that it is made by combining coronavirus with HIV. On the other hand, the standard scientific methodology for identifying a new virus has never been done for COVID-19.)

Control and Track

The ruling elite, the globalists, have been developing mechanisms to use the COVID-19 plandemic and the COVID-19 vaccines as an excuse to control and track people. One consideration is a global passport that shows, among other things, a person’s vaccination status. People would need such a passport to travel. It may also be required for employment and for entering stores, restaurants, sports and entertainment events, etc. Moreover, this passport may be required forever — even long after the pandemic is a forgotten memory. (The ultimate goal of the globalists, the ruling elite, is to turn the world into a society like communist China.)

The current plan calls for giving people who have been vaccinated a vaccination card that shows proof of receiving a COVID-19 vaccination. How long will it be before these cards morph into the equivalent of a global passport? Moreover, people who receive a COVID-19 vaccination will be entered into the States’ immunization registries and reported to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention — so much for medical confidentiality.

View of Louis Farrakhan

In “The Covid-19 Vaccine and the U.S. policy of depopulation,” Ava Muhammad, Student National Spokesperson of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, argues that the COVID-19 vaccine is being used to genocide Blacks. [Any White progressive, liberal, or wokesperson who disagrees with Farrakhan on this or any other issue is a racist and White supremacist.]

This article associates White’s pushing the COVID-19 vaccines with the pale horse of Revelation, i.e., death. For the government to force Blacks to take the COVID-19 vaccines would be a declaration of war.

When COVID-19 vaccines are ready, governmental officials and the presstitute media will vigorously fill people with the fear of COVID-19. [To terrorize people into being vaccinated, every news broadcast stresses the ever-increasing number of COVID-19 cases and the number of hospitalizations. Also, accompanying these reports is a segment on the availability and distribution of the vaccines and their safety and effectiveness.]

Views that disagree with the establishment’s story of COVID-19 and its vaccines are suppressed and censored. The objective is to keep people fearful and ignorant.

Farrakhan believes that the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines are weapons that Whites are using to genocide nonwhites. [If Farrakhan’s bigotry did not blind him, he would realize that the vaccines are as much a threat to Whites as they are to Blacks and the other races. Moreover, the only race facing genocide is the White or Aryan race.]

The article states that big pharma is the largest lobbyist in Washington and owns both parties. [He is correct about big pharma owing both parties. However, the industrial-military-security lobby is probably larger.] People injured by a vaccine cannot sue the vaccine manufacturer. Moreover, people injured from a COVID-19 cannot receive any compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. This prohibition went into effect a month before the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic. [This action looks conspiratorial. Nevertheless, some compensation may be available from the Countermeasure Injury Compensation Program {CICP}. However, the CICP limits the maximum payment that a person injured by a COVID-19 vaccine to $250,000. Most likely, the injured person will receive less, much less, than this amount. However, no payment is made until the injured person has exhausted his private insurance. Also, the CICP only pays the difference between what the insurance covers and the CICP’s cap. Furthermore, the Department of Health and Human Services {DHHS} administers the CICP, and it is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program. Consequently, the DHHS has a conflict of interest that makes the CICP much less likely to find fault with the vaccines. Moreover, the victim has only one year to file a claim. Rarely, does DHHS pay a claim for a vaccine injury — less than 1 percent of those injured receive any compensation. In any event, why should taxpayers be coerced into paying for damages caused by vaccines? Should not vaccine manufacturers be liable for injuries caused by their products?]

[Hopefully, Farrakhan’s hostility toward COVID-19 will prove fruitful. His opposition has caused most governmental officials to cease pushing making vaccination mandatory — although forcing children to be vaccinated to attend a school or to keep child protection agencies from taking unvaccinated children from their families and forcibly vaccinating them remains to be resolved. As for businesses requiring the COVID-19 vaccination to work, buy, or travel, maybe Farrakhan can send thousands of members of Black Lives Matter to protest these businesses to halt their evil ways. They will certainly respond more quickly and more positively to Black protesters than to White protesters. Thus, the fate and temporal salvation of the country and even mankind may depend on Farrakhan and other people like him.]

Conclusion

Dr. Robert Koops writes, “Vaccines are not cures. Vaccines are not preventatives. Vaccines do not seek out and destroy.” (Koops has worked in the pharmaceutical industry in development, quality control, and biopharmaceuticals and vaccines.) The purpose of vaccines is to cause the body’s immune system to produce antibodies to a particular virus. Thus, in theory, if the body is later exposed to this virus, its immune system will recognize it and respond more quickly and efficiently than normal. Like traditional vaccines, the COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent the body from becoming infected; they attack the viruses in the infected body using a different technology as described above.

Governmental officials and the presstitutes are notorious liars. So, why should anyone believe anything that they say until independent sources collaborate their assertions? So far, the independent sources are saying no COVID-19 pandemic exists and, therefore, no vaccines are needed. Furthermore, independent sources are saying that the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines are highly questionable.

Jon Rappoport writes, “What rational person would line up to take this shot?” Perhaps, that is why the first to receive the shots are those who do not have the right to refuse. Farrakhan needs to organize massive protests against vaccinating prisoners to prevent the genocide of Black prisoners.

To end on a positive note, if you are among the 90 percent who has had one of the common cold coronaviruses in recent years, you are probably protected from COVID-19. Many of these cases being reported as COVID-19 may be no more than cases of the common cold.

References

Koops, Roger W. “A Primer for the Media on Viruses, Vaccines, and Covid-19.” – September 25, 2020. https://www.aier.org/article/a-primer-for-the-media-on-viruses-vaccines-and-covid-19/. Accessed September 25, 2020.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “COVID-19 Vaccination May Be Difficult to Avoid.” December 14, 2020. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/12/14/covid-19-vaccine-cicp.aspx. Accessed December 14, 2020.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “Emergency COVID-19 Vaccines May Cause Massive Side Effects.” December 08, 2020. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/12/08/coronavirus-vaccine-side-effects.aspx. December 8, 2020.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “New Report Claims to Shed Light on SARS-CoV-2 Origin.” September 28, 2020. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/27/chinese-whistleblower-coronavirus.aspx. December 8, 2020.

Muhammad, Ava. “The Covid-19 Vaccine and the U.S. policy of depopulation.” December 8, 2020. https://new.finalcall.com/2020/12/08/the-covid-19-vaccine-and-the-u-s-policy-of-depopulation/. Accessed December 14, 2020.

Neill, Steven. “COVID-19 Vaccination Record Cards Will Be Issued.” December 10, 2020. https://thenewamerican.com/covid-19-vaccination-record-cards-will-be-issued/, Accessed December 15, 2020.

Neill, Steven. “Medical Freedom Activists Plan International COVID-19 Vaccine Protests.” November 29, 2020. https://thenewamerican.com/medical-freedom-activists-plan-international-covid-19-vaccine-protests/. Accessed December 15, 2020.

Neill, Steven. “U.K. Health Officials Warn of Allergy Risks From Pfizer COVID–19 Vaccine.” December 10, 2020. https://thenewamerican.com/u-k-health-officials-warn-of-allergy-risks-from-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine/. Accessed December 15, 2020.

Rappoport, Jon. “Shocking report on COVID vaccine adverse effects: the roll-out continues anyway.” December 14, 2020. https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/14/shocking-report-on-covid-vaccine-adverse-effects-the-roll-out-continues-anyway/. December 14, 2020.

Roberts, Paul Craig. “They Are Using Fear to Create Acceptance of Vaccination. Why?” https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/12/13/they-are-using-fear-to-create-acceptance-of-vaccination-why/. December 13, 2020. Accessed December 14. 2020.

Sardi, Bill. “99% Of U.S. Population Would Not Benefit From Mass Vaccination With Pfizer’s RNA Covid-19 Vaccine.” December 11, 2020. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/bill-sardi/99-of-u-s-population-would-not-benefit-from-mass-vaccination-with-pfizers-rna-covid-19-vaccine/. Accessed December 11, 2020.

Sardi, Bill. “The Science Of Lockdown, Masks & Vaccines Crumbles.” September 16, 2020. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/09/bill-sardi/the-science-of-lockdown-masks-vaccines-crumbles/. Accessed September 16, 2020.

Copyright © 2020 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

COVID-19 Vaccine

COVID-19 Vaccine

Thomas Allen

Politicians, governmental health officials, the presstitute media, and others are pushing the COVID-19 vaccine and are encouraging people to take the COVID-19 vaccine when it is available. However, at least two important questions need to be answered. Will the vaccines really be safe or just claimed to be safe? (Of course, the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] will do the bidding of its masters and rule that the vaccines are safe.) Other than being a large moneymaker for big pharma, is a vaccine even necessary?

Many people who are pushing vaccination for COVID-19 have a financial interest in the vaccines. Even their presstitute propaganda media have a financial interest because much of their pay comes from big pharma. 

The pharmaceutical companies that are manufacturing and selling the COVID-19 vaccines have no real interest in producing safe and effective vaccines. They are exempted from any liability, so if the vaccines kill or maim millions of people, big pharma suffers no financial penalties. Moreover, since many people will be required to be vaccinated to work, travel, or go to school, big pharma has a guaranteed market regardless of safety or effectiveness. Also, if the vaccines prove deadly and ineffective, the presstitute media will shill for their masters, big pharma and the political establishment, and conceal any dangers or lack of effectiveness of the vaccines.

(The polio vaccine is an example of the media and political establishment protecting big pharma from the consequences of a deadly vaccine. The polio vaccine contained a cancer virus. A few people tried to expose this fact. However, the presstitute media and political establishment ostracized, made persona non grata, and otherwise destroyed the exposers. Instead of removing a deadly vaccine, the government acted to protect big pharma and its profits. Thus, the polio vaccine proves that power, propaganda, and profits are more important than safety. Some contributed the explosion in cancer during the 1970s and beyond to the polio vaccine.)

Most of the COVID-19 vaccines incorporate a never-before-tried new vaccine technology. Only short-term safety has been evaluated. Long-term safety will not be known until years later. In other applications of this technology, human health effects have been highly deleterious. Some of these adverse health effects did not appear until years later. 

        Furthermore, the vaccines are not designed to protect the vaccinated person from becoming infected with COVID-19. They are designed to lessen the symptoms of COVID-19 after a person becomes infected.

        Also, the vaccines have been solely or almost solely tested on young, healthy people. Little or no testing has been done on the sickly or aged. Testing on them comes when the vaccines are given to them after the FDA approves the vaccines.

Moreover, the immune stimulant, squalene, being used in the COVID-19 vaccines has been linked to Gulf War Syndrome. Naturally, the government and the presstitute media will deny any connection between the immune stimulant and any later health effects just as they have denied any connection between the immune stimulant and Gulf War Syndrome. (Also, manufacturing squalene may be endangering certain species of sharks since shark liver is the best source of squalene.)

The FDA cannot be trusted to protect the public from dangerous vaccines. Big pharma owns the FDA. Besides, the FDA is a political machine and, therefore, is highly susceptible to political pressure. If the president and Congress want a vaccine, the FDA will approve a vaccine — especially since big pharma wants to sell COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccines are risk-free rewards for big pharma because the taxpayers assume all the risk.

Politicians, high-ranking bureaucrats, officers and directors of pharmaceutical companies, presstitutes, and their families should be the first to be vaccinated (and no saline-solution-shot substitutions). If they believe what they promote, they should gladly be first in line for an untried vaccine. After all, since the government guarantees that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe, they should have nothing to fear.

If a person wants complete immunity from COVID-19 with no adverse side effects, all he needs to do is to join Antifa or Black Lives Matter (BLM). Then, he will have complete immunity from COVID-19 with the benefit of immunity from most laws. “Our” governors and mayors have told us so with their actions and occasionally with their words. Unlike what they have done with churches, schools, and businesses, no governor or mayor has restricted the size of Antifa or BLM crowds. Moreover, they have not imposed the requirements for social distancing or wearing a face-covering although most do cover their faces to conceal their identity. While taking a vaccination is risky, being a member of Antifa or BLM is safe and rewarding.

The number of cases of COVID-19 can be reduced significantly with a simple change in the testing procedures. If testers followed Dr. Fauci’s recommendations instead of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recommendations, fewer infections would be measured. The CDC’s recommendations magnify the sample so much that all sorts of irrelevant fragments that have nothing to do with COVID-19 are detected, and, thus, the person tested is identified as having COVID-19. Moreover, as Elon Musk has shown, the test is highly unreliable. He took four tests in one day. Two tests were positive, and two were negative. Even papaya has been tested positive for COVID-19. Also, the New York Times has reported that 90 percent of the people tested as having COVID-19 do not have the disease.

Furthermore, the number of COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths can be significantly reduced with one simple action: Stop paying hospitals bonuses for COVID-19 cases and deaths. Whenever a hospital reports a COVID-19 patient or death, the federal government pays it a bonus. This bonus encourages hospitals to report as many COVID-19 patients and deaths as they can — thus, they greatly inflate COVID-19 cases and deaths. On the other hand, if the federal government ceased paying hospitals bonuses for COVID-19 cases and deaths and started paying bonuses for ingrown toenail cases and deaths, COVID-19 cases and deaths would plummet, and ingrown toenail cases and deaths would soar. The federal government gets what it pays for. It wants COVID-19 cases and deaths, so it pays bonuses for them.

In obedience to their masters in government and big pharma, the presstitute media have terrorized by extravagantly overstating cases of hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19. Terror is being used to stampede fearful people into taking a COVID-19 vaccination. Many presstitutes and political and business leaders are discussing forcing everyone to be vaccinated for COVID-19. The only winners are the politicians and health department bureaucrats, who get to wield more power, and big pharma, which makes a large profit with zero risks (the taxpayers assume the risk). The losers are the people — especially the vaccinated, who receive what are essentially experimental vaccines.

Deaths by COVID-19 have been greatly exaggerated. According to the CDC, the total number of deaths in 2020 is about the same as in 2019. Even the number of deaths of older people after the invasion of COVID-19 is about the same as it was before COVID-19. Offsetting the thousands of COVID-19 deaths is a reduction in other causes of death. The reduction in other causes of death approximates the deaths by COVID-19. (In an article, “A closer look at US deaths due to COVID-19” in “The John Hopkins News-Letter,” Genevier Briand uses CDC data to show that COVID-19 deaths are offset by a decrease in other causes of death such that there is little or no net gain in deaths after COVID-19 as compared with deaths before COVID-19. John Hopkins has since censored and removed this article.) The CDC seems to agree with her conclusion. According to the CDC, COVID-19 has caused only about 16,000 deaths. Other diseases and accidents account for the remaining deaths attributed to COVID-19.

As shown above, the COVID-19 “pandemic” (plandemic) is a scam to enrich big pharma. More important, from their perspective, the pandemic has fed the uncontrollable insatiable lust for power that consumes politicians and governmental health bureaucrats as they usurp ever more unchecked power. Unfortunately, it has terrorized most people into enslaving themselves to these politicians and bureaucrats. Moreover, these terrorized people will gladly line up to be injected with a poison that they believe will save them from a virus that they believe is more deadly than the Ebola virus.

Copyright © 2020 by Thomas Allen.

More political articles.

Some Random Thoughts on Political Issues

Some Random Thoughts on Political Issues

Thomas Allen

An explanation of how we got to where we are is summarized. Also, discussed are the beginnings of progressivism, compromise, socialist compassion, discrimination, education, forced vaccination, sanctuary cities, mental health and guns, and protective tariffs and piety.

How We Got to Where We Are
Augustine of Hippo, who was a father of Roman Catholicism, begot Calvin and Calvinism, who begot the Puritans of England. From the Puritans of England  came the Puritans of New England .

     In A History of the Christian Church (1870), Dr. Charles Hase describes the Puritans of England as follows: “In their morals and manners they were eminently pious, they looked upon all earthly pleasures as sinful, their own fancies were regarded as divine inspirations, and they thought that the state itself should be subject to their democratic hierarchy.” This description fits the Liberal Democrat of today, except what was considered pleasures then differs some from what is considered pleasures today.
The Puritan of New England begot the Yankee, who begot the abolitionist, who begot the Radical Republican, who begot the Progressive, who begot the Liberal Democrat. Augustine and all his philosophical and religious descendants to this day know how people ought to live, and they are determined to do everything in their power to make them live that way. Their god may differ, but their religiosity is the same. These are the people who have been controlling the country since 1860.

Progressivism: Its Beginnings
Progressivism began in the Washington administration with the struggle between the Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians. The Hamiltonians captured the Federalist party and imposed its version of progressivism with the First Bank of the United States being one of its gems. The Jeffersonians eventually drove the Hamiltonians from power, and the Federalist party died. Later, the Hamiltonians organized the Whig party whose version of progressivism included a central bank, high protective tariffs, and federally financed internal improvements. Finally, the Whigs amalgamated with several smaller parties to form the Republican party. Afterward, the Republican party put that great progressive Abraham Lincoln in office. Lincoln’s version of progressivism included driving the Southern States out of the union with the highest protective tariffs that the United States had endured to that time. Then, he denied the Southern States their right to secede and warred against them. To do this, he destroyed the Constitution. His war against the Constitution was so successful that the country has never recovered from it. When Woodrow Wilson entered office, he implemented his version of progressivism. Since then both the Democratic and Republican parties have been advocates of the Hamiltonian philosophy and progressivism.

Compromise Washington Style
The following is an example of what passes for compromise in Washington. Politicians who want to remove the people’s ability to defend themselves from despotic government propose to limit the capacity of magazines for semiautomatic rifles, which they erroneously call assault weapons, to ten rounds. Eventually, a “compromise” is reached with those who wanted no restriction. Finally, a restriction of 15 rounds is adopted. (One of my bosses said that he always asked for more than he wanted so that he could “compromise” back to what he really wanted.) The side that wanted a restriction has won; they gained a restriction. Conversely, the side that wanted no restriction has lost; they gained nothing.
With a true compromise, both sides receive something. For example, in exchange for limiting the size of a magazine, the restriction requiring the purchase of a mail-order firearm through a licensed dealer is removed.
As the above example shows in the first paragraph, O’Sullivan’s Law rules Washington. According to O’Sullivan’s Law, any organization that is not expressly right-wing will become left-wing over time. Thus, the United States government has implemented about 80 percent of the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto.
O’Sullivan’s Law is also revealed in what now passes as a “moderate.” Since the beginning of the progressive era, moderates have been drifting leftward politically, socially, and economically. Today, what is considered a moderate would have been considered a borderline communist fifty years ago.

Socialist Compassion
Socialists present themselves as compassionate — the ones who truly care about the common man and the little guy. Yet, the socialist president of Venezuela refused to allow food into the country for the starving masses, after he and the previous socialist president had destroyed the country with socialism. He proves that socialists care nothing for the common man and the little guy. Socialists just lust for power and want to control the common people and treat them worse than cattle. (At least they feed the cattle to keep them fat for the slaughter.) Of course, if anyone with a functioning brain cell would look at the best-known socialists of the twentieth century, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Hitler, he would see the real compassion that socialists have for the common man and the little guy.

Discrimination
Today, people are allowed and even obligated to discriminate against two ethnicities. They are the Southerner and the Palestinian. At least, so far, the Southerner has not been dehumanized to the level of the Palestinian. Just as the British hunted and killed Tasmanians with impunity, Israelis can hunt and kill Palestinians with impunity.

Education
All politicians say that they favor education and want to improve public education. If they were honest, they would use the phrase “government schools” instead of “public education.”
How do they want to improve government schools? Do they want to make them better at indoctrinating pupils and teaching them what to think, which is what government schools currently do? Or, do they want to make them educate pupils and teach them how to think?
One can easily tell where a candidate stands. If he wants to spend more money on the current system, he favors indoctrination and the continuation of dumbing down pupils. However, if he proposes prohibiting all the school systems in the State from accepting federal funds and using any material or books offered or recommended by the US Department of Education, he favors educating and teaching pupils how to think critically.
Nevertheless, the public school system cannot be reformed because it is socialistic. Being socialistic, it breeds scarcity and mediocrity. It is the government telling parents where, how, and what their children’s minds are to be fed. Moreover, it is based on the premise that children belong to the government, and parents merely provide for the physical care of the government’s property.
About the governmental (public) school system, which the Puritans originated in the United States, James A. Bayard writes that “the Yankee school system . . . may stimulate the brain but it ignores man’s moral nature and produces discontent with their condition among the masses. God help the country in which the masses are merely stimulated and trained to act in combinations which are always, sooner or later, controlled by demagogues.”

Forced Vaccination
Pro-abortionists should be at the forefront of protesting against forced vaccinations — if they are consistent and not hypocrites. They argue that women should have control of their bodies. Therefore, the government should not tell women what they have to do with their bodies. However, forced vaccination is based on the premise that the government can tell women what they must do with their bodies: receive a vaccine injection, i.e., receive an injection of such toxins as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde (embalming fluid), propylene glycol (antifreeze), nagalase (prevents the body from killing cancer cells and strongly associated with autism [http://www.thebigriddle.com/2015/12/ murdered-holistic-doctors-discovered.html]), and cells of aborted babies. Of course, they probably do not mind ejecting people with aborted baby cells. Since pro-abortionists grew out of the culture of death and since many pro-abortionists favor forced vaccination, they must expect vaccinations to be more harmful than beneficial.
Most of those who favor forcing all American children to be vaccinated favor open borders. As a result of the mass immigration of illegal aliens, unvaccinated people carrying all sorts of contagious diseases, are flooding the country. One would think that these forced-vaccination people would be at the forefront in demanding that all immigrants be coerced into taking the 36 plus vaccines that they want to force American children to take, before entering the country.
If vaccines are safe and effective, why has Congress prohibited people from suing vaccine manufacturers for injuries caused by vaccines? Moreover, why is information exposing the dangers and the ineffectiveness of vaccines being suppressed? Also, why do people whose children have been vaccinated fear their children playing with children who have not been vaccinated? Should not the vaccine protect their children from unvaccinated children if it is effective?

Sanctuary Cities
Anyone who opposes sanctuary cities would, if he is consistent, have opposed cities and counties of the 1850s refusing to aid the US government in enforcing fugitive slave laws. Both are philosophically the same. Under both, local governments attempt to nullify a federal law.
Unlike their State governments, local governments have no legal or lawful authority to nullify a federal law unless their States have given them that authority. Being the creation of their State, local governments can only do what their State allows and must do as their State directs. Likewise, the States created the U.S. government; therefore, they have the right and duty to judge for themselves, acting independently and individually, whether the U.S. government has exceeded its authority. Thus, a State may nullify a federal law, as it applies in that State, that it decides is unconstitutional. A local government cannot nullify a federal law unless its creator State authorized it to do so.

Mental Health and Guns
On a talk radio show some years ago, the host and his guest were discussing mental health. They wondered why so many people did not seek professional help for their mental problems. While I was listening, they failed to mention one major reason. What was this major reason that they did not mention? Unlike being diagnosed with diabetes or heart problems, when one is diagnosed with mental problems, he is at a high risk of losing his constitutionally guaranteed inalienable right to own firearms — usually, forever.

Protection Tariffs and Piety
Following are some comments on “Protectionism as a Path to Piety” by John Howting that appears in the May 2019 issue of Chronicles. Mr. Howting asserts, or at least appears to assert, that protective tariffs are acts of piety.
Where is the justice in the politically powerful forcing, ultimately under the penalty of death, the politically weak to subsidize the politically powerful, which is what a protective tariff does? Protective tariffs require politicians to pick winners and losers. When have politicians excelled at this job? They will always side with the politically powerful.
How is forcing someone, the weak, to support another, the strong, which is what a protective tariff does, piety? Furthermore, is not forcing someone to pay more for products protected by tariffs somewhat impious?
How does a protective tariff today honor one’s ancestors from 200, 400, or 800 years ago? Moreover, how does a protective tariff today, even honor one’s parents who are dead? How do one’s children honor their parents by paying tribute to the politically powerful?
If protective tariffs promote piety, would not outlawing grocery stores, butcher shops, farmers’ markets, and the like and requiring every family to raise its own food promote piety even more? Would not this be the ultimate in piety as Mr. Howting describes piety?
Would not the piety that Mr. Howting describes be best achieved and can only be achieved when people are convinced to buy locally produced products, even if they cost more and are poorer quality, than to import them from other countries or even other States?
[Editor’s note: Mr. Howting wrote a formal response to this letter. His response was in the July 2019 issue of Chronicles.]

Copyright © 2019 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.