In the old days, before living on this planet became an endless episode of The Twilight Zone combined with a Franz Kafka novel, you could be forgiven for doing something that someone else didn’t like.

Not anymore.

Now people are routinely fired or de-platformed or creatively destroyed economically for having a different opinion. You used to be able to apologize and then the offended party would forgive you, and that would be the end of it. But now, in the new tolerant politically correct world, you must be destroyed.

Here is the latest list.

I suppose if someone wanted to build an authoritarian dystopia with total domination over the individual, this could not be accomplished with differing opinions and views floating around freely. That would be dangerous and you need to protect yourself. Free speech must be redefined to mean speech you agree with.

I fear society is moving from brainwashed to brain dead.

“Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

Mark Twain

“In a matter of weeks, the entire planet went from normalcy to fear, panic, paranoia, confinement, unemployment, police-state surveillance and extreme social distancing. Millions of citizens who thrived on freedom and free enterprise are now on “house-arrest” and must rely on the government for subsistence.”

the vigilant citizen

80,000 deaths from the flu in 2018 – United States

1,200 deaths from Covid-19 – United States

Found an editorial from the British Medical Journal in 2010 about the other flu pandemic H1N1 which went from panic to nothing, with billions made in the background.

“Meanwhile drug companies have banked vast profitsÑ$7bn (£4.8bn; {euro}5.7bn) to $10bn from vaccines alone according to investment bank JP Morgan.1 Given the scale of public cost and private profit, it would seem important to know that WHO’s key decisions were free from commercial influence.
 
An investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, published this week (doi:10.1136/bmj.c2912), finds that this was far from the case.2 As reported by Deborah Cohen and Philip Carter, some of the experts advising WHO on the pandemic had declarable financial ties with drug companies that were producing antivirals and influenza vaccines. As an example, WHO’s guidance on the use of antivirals in a pandemic was authored by an influenza expert who at the same time was receiving payments from Roche, the manufacturer of oseltamivir (Tamiflu), for consultancy work and lecturing. Although most of the experts consulted by WHO made no secret of their industry ties in other settings, WHO itself has so far declined to explain to what extent it knew about these conflicts of interest or how it managed them.
 
This lack of transparency is compounded by the existence of a secret “emergency committee,” which advised the director general Margaret Chan on when to declare the pandemicÑa decision that triggered costly pre-established vaccine contracts around the world. Curiously, the names of the 16 committee members are known only to people within WHO.
 
Cohen and Carter’s findings resonate with those of other investigations, most notably an inquiry by the Council of Europe, which reports this week and is extremely critical of WHO.1 It concludes that decision making around the influenza A/H1N1 crisis has been lacking in transparency.
 
One of its chief protagonists is Paul Flynn, a UK member of parliament and a member of the council’s Parliamentary Assembly. He and others raised concerns last year about the lack of evidence to justify the scale of the international response to H1N1 (as also covered in the BMJ in December3), and the lack of transparency around the decision making process for declaring the pandemic.1

But then I found out I would be required to take a TB test. I’m not a fan of being injected with things because the government says so, and I don’t believe that tests and vaccines are 100% safe. The reason is always about public safety, but sometimes it’s more about money.

I found an article about extracting money from a stagnant marketplace. TB is almost non- existent in Canada, so I guess it qualifies as a stagnant marketplace. In other words, how to make a lot of money by pretending there is a huge risk. Plus, Big Pharma needs to keep those shareholders happy. The parent company of Aventis is worth about $125 billion, and we all know that’s never enough.

And remember, there is no money to be made with a healthy population. Health care is a for-profit industry and they need customers.

Here is part of the article:

http://From the July 2005 Idaho Observer: Alternatives to TB Testing: Reasons to avoid the Mantoux Skin test By Vaccination Liberation Over the past six months Vaccination Liberation has received many requests for information on the TB skin test due to the fact that their college or place of employment is now requiring such a test be performed. Wondering why this was all of a sudden a huge issue, VacLib co-director Wendy Callahan sent an email about the availability of a book for a whopping $1500 entitled Tuberculosis: Extracting Value from a Stagnant Marketplace that was published in September 2002. In their sales plug for this overpriced “report”, the reasons to purchase it are as follows: (1.) Identify the areas of the TB market which offer the highest potential for new market entrants, (2.) Understand the changing competitive dynamics in the TB market, and (3.) Identify the key epidemiological trends for TB in the major markets. So the old adage “follow the money” certainly applies to the latest big Pharma/public health assault to our bodies. It is interesting to note that Dr. David Ayoub attempted to find out from Aventis exactly how many doses of Tubersol® are sold in the U.S. annually. Aventis refused to reveal this information so one can only imagine the incredible profits Aventis is making off this one product.

When students demanded divestment from fossil fuels, this is what happened. Reality and ideology clash. No fossil fuels – no heat. You choose.

https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/01/31/students-demanded-disinvestment-fossil-fuels-professor-offered-turn-off-heat/

The world is on a very scary path when financial ruin awaits those who have different opinions. It’s okay not to like Don Cherry. Before the hysterical cry baby culture took over, you would just change the channel.

Inflation in Canada is running at 2.2 %.

Sure it is.

The news about the new hydro rates claims that our bills are going up $2.00 a month, which is right in line with inflation. Great news!

Until you notice that the Time-Of-Use pricing has gone up 40% from the rates in May. So if you don’t use any hydro, your bill will only go up by the fictitious rate of inflation.

By the way, property taxes are going up 10%, not 2.2%.

Who can stop these thieving liars?

This looks promising.

It’s a documentary about the attacks on free speech. And if freedom of speech doesn’t interest you, be prepared for the gulag.

Check out the trailer here.

Remember, bigotry is a noun > intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself.

It cuts both ways.

We were at the Stratford Festival (in Ontario, not England) last week to see the brilliant play The Crucible by Arthur Miller. It is about the Salem witch trials, and it was written when Miller had seen the effects of the Senator McCarthy Red Scare hearings.

Craig Walker wrote in the program notes:

“But what is the meaning of The Crucible here and now? Naturally, audiences can make up their own minds about this. In recent years, the phrase “witch hunt” has been used in a wide variety of contexts, some clearly more appropriate than others. But what seems painfully relevant is the stark partisanship of the current cultural tone, one in which disagreements in politics, on social media, and even in universities, are ever more frequently framed in a simplistic binary of good versus evil. With such stakes, no real differences of opinion about anything important can be tolerated. One must conform or be an outcast. Perhaps fearfulness is the cause of such absolutism; tyranny almost always justifies itself as a necessary response to imminent threat. Whatever the cause, the ultimate result can be a poisonous stew of sanctimoniousness, viciousness, and blame-shifting. The protagonist John Proctor’s rhetorical question rings out: “Is the accuser always holy now? Were they born this morning as clean as God’s fingers?”

Something to think about the next time a person’s livelihood is ruined by unproven accusations via the HUAC of our day – the #MeToo movement.