Monday, January 29, 2024

The Growth in America's Disabled Workforce - Causation or Correlation?

In this brief posting, I will provide you with two graphics; one showing the growth in the number of disabled Americans over the age of 16 who are in the civilian labour force and the cumulative number of COVID-19 vaccines that have been administered in the United States during the pandemic.


First, a graph from FRED showing the significant growth in the number of disabled Americans in the civilian labour force:


In March 2020, there were 6.418 million disabled American workers, a number which rapidly began to rise from 5.846 million in January 2021.  Note that the number of disabled American workers actually declined during the first phase of the pandemic when only natural immunity was available to fight the SARS-CoV-2 virus.  After hitting a recent peak of 8.477 million in August 2023, by December 2023, this had retreated to 8.293 million, an increase of  2.477 million or 41.86 percent since January 2021.  This is an unprecedented increase in the number of disabled workers going back to mid-2008.


Now, from Our World In Data, here is a graph showing the number of COVID-19 vaccines administered in the United States since the mRNA vaccines were first rolled out in December 2020:


While one cannot say for certain that the COVID-19 vaccines have led to an increase in the number of disabled American workers, at the very least, it is interesting to observe that just as the vaccines were rolling out in early 2021, the number of disabled workers started to climb significantly and continued to do so until August 2023 when the number seems to have stabilized shortly after the number of vaccines administered levelled off.


I will let you draw your own conclusions from the data that I have presented in this posting.  Is it causation or just correlation?  Perhaps there is a link between long COVID and the growing number of disabled American workers, however, this too is difficult to prove since long COVID is a relatively unexplained and incompletely documented phenomenon.

Wednesday, January 24, 2024

Antony Fauci and the Evolving Truth About the COVID-19 Pandemic

While the transcript from his testimony has not yet been released to the public, recent postings on the website of Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), Chairman of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic should be an eye-opener for those who pointed the accusatory finger at the "conspiracy coven" who were convinced that not everything that Dr. Anthony Fauci said was true.  Here are some of the key takeaways from the two days of testimony:


1.) Day 1:


1.) Dr. Fauci claimed he “did not recall” pertinent COVID-19 information or conversations more than 100 times.

2.) Dr. Fauci profusely defended his previous Congressional testimony where he stated NIH does not fund gain-of-function research in Wuhan.

3.) He repeatedly played semantics with the definition of gain-of-function in an attempt to avoid conceding that NIH funded potentially dangerous research in China.

4.) Dr. Fauci testified that he signed off on every foreign and domestic NIAID grant without reviewing the proposals.

5.) A 2020 email, previously released by the Select Subcommittee, proved Dr. Fauci was aware of dangerous gain-of-function research occurring in Wuhan, China. Today, he backtracked by arguing he should not have stated that as “fact.”

6.) Dr. Fauci was unable to confirm if NIAID has ANY mechanisms to conduct oversight of the foreign laboratories they fund.

2.) Day 2:


1.) Dr. Fauci claimed that the “6 feet apart” social distancing recommendation promoted by federal health officials was likely not based on any data. He characterized the development of the guidance by stating “it sort of just appeared.”

2.) Dr. Fauci acknowledged that the lab leak hypothesis is not a conspiracy theory. This comes nearly four years after prompting the publication of the now infamous “Proximal Origin” paper that attempted to vilify and disprove the lab leak hypothesis.

3.) Dr. Fauci admitted that America’s vaccine mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic could increase vaccine hesitancy in the future. Previously, Dr. Fauci advocated “that when you make it difficult for people in their lives, they lose their ideological bullshit, and they get vaccinated.”

4.) When American universities approached Dr. Fauci, he advised them to impose vaccine mandates on their students.

5.) Dr. Fauci denies allegations that he visited the CIA during the pandemic or influenced the CIA’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19.

6.) Dr. Fauci played semantics with the definition of a “lab-leak” in an attempt to cover-up the inaccurate conclusions of “Proximal Origin.” It is impossible for Dr. Fauci to defend the conclusion of this publication while simultaneously acknowledging that a lab-leak is possible.

The first takeaway from Day 2 should not be surprising given that various jurisdictions had various rules regarding social distancing ranging from 3 feet (1 metre) to 4.5 feet (1.5 metres) to 6 feet (2 metres).  Just think of the money that was spent by businesses and governments who put those stupid stickers on pavement and flooring to remind the sheeple that they needed to maintain a distance from each other when there was no scientific basis for the reommendation.  I also found this interesting:


"Dr. Fauci admitted that America’s vaccine mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic could increase vaccine hesitancy in the future."


Given the very low uptake rates for the COVID-19 boosters, particularly the most recent booster for 2023/2024, I would say that most people have reached the point of vaccine exhaustion.


Those who were paying attention over the past four years have sensed that all was not right with Fauci's constantly evolving narrative when it came to masking and vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic.  It now looks like the small percentage of the population that actually took the time to think about what was being said by Anthony Fauci and other public health officials are now being proven correct in their suspicions that we were all being gaslit.

Apparently, the truth about the COVID-19 pandemic really is evolving.

Monday, January 22, 2024

Speaking the Truth at Davos 2024 - The Problem with the Global Elites

While your local globalist media organization will only barely mention the 2024 edition of the World Economic Forum's meeting in Davos, Switzerland, there is one speaker that received minimal coverage because he spoke the truth that the ruling class needed to hear.


At a panel entitled "What to Expect from a Possible Republican Administration", the president of the right-leaning Heritage Foundation, Dr. Kevin Roberts, made the following comments when asked by the British moderator of the panel, Sir Robin Niblett (7 minute 50 second mark):


Robin Niblett: "Using our assumptions as they are, even a Trump Administration may have won the popular vote, I'll say, it is likely that whoever wins, people are going to be contesting therefore that 60 vote margin becomes quite important....On the domestic side...what kinds of people, and if you've got some names, put them out there, do you think might be the kinds of people the Trump Administration....will pull in on the big domestic agenda elements....?"


Dr. Roberts: The kind of person, and I'll be candid here because I think that I've been invited here to be candid the kind of person who will come into the next conservative administration is going to be governed by one principle and that is destroying the grasp that political elites and unelected technocrats have over the average person.  And, if I may, I will be candid and say the agenda that every single member of the administration needs to have is to compile a list of everything that's ever been proposed at the World Economic Forum and object to all of them wholesale.  Anyone not prepared to do that, take away the power from the unelected bureaucrats and give it back to the American people is unprepared to be part of the next conservative administration."


When the moderator made the following comment (20 minutes 45 second mark):


Robin Niblett: " said yourself, a minute ago, anyone who is not with the program is not going to be in an administration.  One thing, that Davos, you might say and the people may stand up for is liberal democracy so if the idea of that's going to be swept under the table is part of the idea hopefully that's not what he (Trump) means."


Dr. Roberts: "It's laughable that you or anyone would describe Davos as protecting liberal democracy.  It's equally laughable to use the word ‘dictatorship’ at Davos and aim that at President Trump. In fact, I think that's absurd.


President Trump, if he's the next president, for that matter, the next conservative president is going to take on the power of the elites which I mentioned earlier.


But the thing that I want to drive home here, The very reason I’m here at Davos, is to explain to many people in this room and who are watching, with all due respect – nothing personal – that you are part of the problem.


Political elites tell the average people on three or four or five issues that the reality is ‘x,’ when in fact, reality is ‘y,’.  Take immigration.  Elites tell us that open borders are, and even illegal immigration, are okay.....Elites also tell us that public safety isn't a problem in big American cities....Thirdly, I guess the favourite at the World Economic Forum, is climate change.  Elites tell us that we have this existential crisis with so-called climate change so much so that climate alarmism is probably the greatest cause for mental health crisis in the world.  The solutions, the average person know, based on climate change, are far worse and more harmful and cost more human lives, especially in Europe during the time that you need heating than do the problem and the problems themselves."


Roberts goes on to note that Trump, if elected president, will have the will of the people backing him.


If you wish to hear the entire panel discussion, please click here.


The global elite are once again shaking in their collective boots over the spectre of a second Trump Administration.  While Donald Trump is not viewed positively by many world leaders, we cannot deny that his priority is the United States, unlike leaders like Canada's Justin Trudeau who are puppets of the World Economic Forum and its ruling class members.  It will be interesting to see what lengths the rulers are willing to go to to prevent a Trump reelection in 2024.

Wednesday, January 17, 2024

Chrystia Freeland and the Global Elite - Davos 2024 Edition

For those Canadians that pay attention to Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland's connections to the global elite through her position as a member of the Board of Trustees of the World Economic Forum, it appeared that she was not going to attend this year's Davos cluster*ck which is being held between January 15th and January 17th, 202 .  This seemed to be a fact based on her publicly released itinerary for Monday, January 15, 2024 which looked like this:



...and her itinerary for Tuesday, January 16, 2024 which looked like this:


Unfortunately, and not terribly surprisingly, her itinerary for Wednesday, January 17, 2024 looked like this:



I'm just guessing but I suspect that her "private meetings" on January 16th were being held at the Ottawa International Airport where she caught a business class flight to Switzerland.


The only question left to ask is whether Canadian taxpayers are funding Ms. Chrystia "I'm not in a conflict of interest because I say that I'm not" Freeland's 2024 trip to Davos as they did in 2023:


Chrystia Freeland - a prime example of "rules for thee but not for me because I'm special".  But, don't forget, she doesn't need a car because she can walk to the subway.

Monday, January 15, 2024

100 Days of War in Gaza - Who is Really Suffering?

This statement was released from the Biden White House on January 14, 2024:


Joe Biden (or whoever it is that is speaking on his behalf) conveniently seems to have forgotten these aspects of life in Gaza:







and, most importantly:



While I am loathe to trust any medical journal after the COVID-19 pandemic, here's what the Lancet has to say about the possibility of inflated mortality reporting from the Gaza Ministry of Health, something that the Israelis have accused Hamas of doing (with my bold):

"Using publicly available information, we compared the Gaza MoH's mortality reports with a separate source of mortality reporting and found no evidence of inflated rates. We conducted a temporal analysis of cumulative-reported mortality within Gaza for deaths of Gazans as reported by the MoH and reported staff member deaths from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), from Oct 7 to Nov 10, 2023. These two data sources used independent methods of mortality verification, enabling assessment of reporting consistency.  We observed similar daily trends, indicating temporal consistency in response to bombing events

Mortality reporting is difficult to conduct in ongoing conflicts. Initial news reports might be imprecise, and subsequent verified reports might undercount deaths that are not recorded by hospitals or morgues, such as persons buried under rubble. However, difficulties obtaining accurate mortality figures should not be interpreted as intentionally misreported data.

Although valid mortality counts are important, the situation in Gaza is severe, with high levels of civilian harm and extremely restricted access to aid. Efforts to dispute mortality reporting should not distract from the humanitarian imperative to save civilian lives by ensuring appropriate medical supplies, food, water, and fuel are provided immediately."

But, then again, residents of Gaza haven't the capacity that their pro-Israel counterparts possess as shown here:

...and here:

Washington is for sale and Israel is in a buying mood which just might be part of the reason why the Biden Administration has not pressured the Netanyahu war cabinet into shutting down its brutal operation in Gaza.

Sunday, January 14, 2024

Davos 2024 and Disease X - Raising the Spectre of the Next Pandemic

At this year's edition of the ruling class's love fest (aka the Davos circle jerk), there is one fascinating session that is taking place on January 17th under the WEF's "A Long-term Strategy for Climate, Nature and Energy" group of sessions.  It is particularly interesting given what the world has been through after the Event 201 pandemic exercise took place on October 18, 2019 in which the WEF took part as shown here:


Here is the program background for the session about Disease X from the WEF website:

So, our overlords are already planning for "Disease X", a disease that "could result in 20 times more fatalities" than the COVID-19 plandemic.  You'll note that the head of the World Health Organization and chief global promoter of the COVID-19 pandemic narrative, Tedros Ghebreyesus and the Chair of the Board of AstraZeneca Michel Demare are taking part in the session because, after all, they have nothing to gain by pandemic fear mongering, do they?


Back in November 2022, the World Health Organization was already raising the spectre of the next pandemic in which it invoked the term "Disease X" as an unknown pathogen that could cause a serious international epidemic as shown here:



Let's look even further down the Disease X rabbit hole as shown here:


Here is the text of House Resolution 3832 which was introduced on June 5, 2023:



For those of you who aren't aware, BARDA stands for the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority which falls under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:


One of its focuses is its Pandemic Influenza Program as follows:


This fixation by the ruling class on pandemics could be considered rather pathological given that there have only been three pandemics since 1900 (excluding the COVID-19 "pandemic"); the Spanish Flu in 1918, the Asian Flu in 1957, the Hong Kong Flu in 1968 which killed very few individuals.  There were other pandemic threats which included the Swine Flu in 1976, the Russian Flu in 1977 and the Avian Flu in 1997 but none of these three spread beyond restricted regions of the globe.  That said, if there is one thing that the rulers have learned it's that gaslighting the global population by invoking the spectre of a deadly disease is a surefire means to be able to control most of us.

Terrorizing us into perpetual serfdom yet again.

Wednesday, January 10, 2024

The Next Moves Toward a Digital Dollar

At the end of November 2023, the Bank of Canada published a report that outlined the results of its public consultations on a central bank digital currency which I covered in this posting.  The Bank admitted the following:


1.) Canadians place a high value on holding cash that is backed by their central bank and want to maintain access to bank notes.

2.) Canadians value their right to privacy and many expressed concerns that a digital dollar could compromise that right.

3.) A digital dollar should be easily accessible and should neither add barriers nor worsen existing ones.

4.) A digital dollar should not add to financial stability risks.

...and, most importantly, stated this:


"Whether and when a digital dollar will become needed is uncertain. Ultimately, the decision to go ahead with a digital dollar belongs to Canadians, through their representatives in Parliament.


The Bank will continue to engage with stakeholders on the key issues and features that matter most to Canadians, such as privacy, accessibility and inclusion, security and technology, financial stability and the design of a business ecosystem. Canadians will have more opportunities to provide input on a potential digital Canadian dollar."

The report clearly showed that Canadians were not in favour of a digital currency now or in the future.


That said, recent developments would suggest that the Bank of Canada is preparing itself to issue a central bank digital currency with or without the approval of Main Street Canada.  On December 13th, 2023, the Bank of Canada filed applications with the Canadian government's Registrar of Trademarks under the Trademarks Act for the following "marks" that it wishes to protect for its own use:


1.) Digital Canadian Dollar:


2.) Digital Dollar:



3.) CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCY which is defined as follows:


a.)  Programmable, exchangeable digital currency; programmable, exchangeable digital currency wallet; exchangeable central bank digital currency; portable, exchangeable digital currency.

b.) Issuance and distribution of digital currency; exchange of central bank digital currency asset from one entity to another; conversion to and from other forms of money; online platform for maintaining and using technology for financial transactions; offline platform for maintaining and using technology for financial transactions.

Now, you might think that this is just a central bank preparing for the possibility that, at some point in the future, the Canadian government may just approve the issuance of a Canadian central bank digital currency, however, you need to keep in mind that the Trudeau government is a world leader when it comes to following the diktats of the World Economic Forum, thanks to this individual who just happens to be Canada's Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister and a member of the World Economic Forum's Board of Trustees:

The World Economic Forum is heavily involved in the implementation of digital currencies through its Digital Currency Governance Consortium as you can read here:

...and here where it outlines the advantages to CBDCs:

One thing that Canadians can assure themselves of is that the bank account freezing Freeland will heavily favour the implementation of a digital currency that can be used to control the behaviour of Canadians should she happen to be in a position of political power when the digital Canadian dollar is brought into existence.

Thursday, January 4, 2024

Lithium Battery Technology - The Snake Oil Solution to the Climate Emergency

Doesn't this seem like a wonderful idea?  Emissions-free mass transit, killing two "climate change birds" with one stone:


Here's a quote:


"Thanks to such investments, “Oslo is getting closer to becoming the first city in the world to boast 100% emission-free public transport! Moreover, everything indicates that the goal of completely emission-free public transport set by the metropolis will be achieved 5 years earlier than expected”, the manufacturer says."


But, let's look at reality according to the Nordic Times:


..and, another quote with my bolds:


"...The buses run out of power more quickly. We are now registering what happens day by day, and then we will see how we can improve this in the future, Cathrine Myhren-Haugen, communications manager at Ruter, told the Norwegian newspaper Nordre Aker Budstikke."


"On Tuesday, the cold weather continued to cause problems for the electric buses and more departures had to be cancelled. A total of 90 bus departures were reportedly canceled."


For those of us who live in northern climes, we are already aware of the limitations of lithium battery technology in cold weather.  While vehicles powered with lithium batteries may function well in climates like those found in southern Europe and southern parts of the United States (as long as temperatures aren't too high which also negatively impacts lithium batteries), such is not the case where winter temperatures significantly degrade the range of EVs of all types.


Here is a quote from research by Shuai Ma et al in an article entitled "Temperature effect and thermal impact in lithium-ion batteries: A review":


"The performance of LIB (lithium ion batteries) will degrade at temperatures below 0 °C . In 2001, Nagasubramanian showed that the power and energy densities of Panasonic 18650 LIBs were ~800 W/L and ~100 Wh/L at 25 °C, and these values were reduced by 98.75% and 95% to < 10 W/L and ~5 Wh/L at −40 °C. In another report, the state of charge (SOC) of a LIB, which is defined as the ratio of the present residual capacity to the overall available capacity, was also found to decrease by ~23% when the operating temperature decreased from 25 °C to −15 °C.


...and, even more worrying is this:


"Most of the temperature effects are related to chemical reactions occurring in the batteries and also materials used in the batteries. Regarding chemical reactions, the relationship between the rate of chemical reactions and reaction temperature follows Arrhenius equation, and temperature variation can lead to the change of electrochemical reaction rate in batteries. Besides chemical reactions, the ionic conductivities of electrodes and electrolytes are also affected by temperature. For example, the ionic conductivity of lithium salt based electrolytes decreases at low temperatures. With these effects in concern, the LIBs used in EVs and HEVs can hardly meet the expectation of a 10-year life suggested by the United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC)."


Obviously, the decision makers who are forcing EV technology down the throats of their constituents have no understanding of basic science, rather, they have fallen prey to the lure of the lithium battery, the snake oil solution to the climate change "emergency".