Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 13

Below is the thirteenth chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 13: Does it work?

No, the Covid-19 vaccines are not effective at all. They don’t stop infection or transmission, contrary to what we were told at the time. When it became apparent they didn’t do what a vaccine is supposed to do (stop infection and transmission) we were then told the vaccine was effective in minimising the infection and keeping us out of hospital.

This was a lie. No one actually knew if this was the case. Nothing in the vaccine trial suggested this might be true and, more to the point, the claimed minimisation of infection was never actually tested or evaluated in any of the trials. As I say, this was simply a lie.

Do you remember the fanfare in late 2020 when we were told vaccine redemption was close to hand? Do you remember the adulation and the frenzied gratitude toward those lovely, thoughtful, deeply caring people in the Big Pharma Industry who arrived like the heroic cavalry at the 11th hour to save us all from certain death?

The vaccine is 95% effective we were told. Hoorah for the vaccine! And out most of us duly trudged to wait in line for our jab of salvation. What did they mean by 95% effective, though? Effective against what, exactly? If the vaccines didn’t stop infection, transmission, severity of illness or death, where on earth did the “effective” in 95% effective come from?

We were led to believe it simply meant that out of every one hundred vaccinated people, ninety-five could happily get Covid-19 and shake it off in a jiffy, whilst five unfortunate people would not. This is not the case at all, though, and has to do with Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) and Relative Risk Reduction (RRR).

Approximately forty-two thousand people were involved in the Pfizer vaccine trial. Twenty-one thousand were given the vaccine, and twenty-one thousand a placebo. The latter is known as the Control Group. A few weeks later both groups were tested for signs of Covid-19 symptoms such as a cough, cold, fever etc, which were “confirmed” by a positive PCR test.

Continue reading

Lying Liars and the People Who Believe Them

The serialization of Paul Weston’s book about the COVID-19 scam (most recent chapter here) has made me ruminate on the official mendacity that has been the main feature of whole deadly process. We were lied to about how dangerous the disease was. We were lied to about its origin. We were lied to about the PCR testing regimen that putatively detected infection with the disease. We were lied to about the effectiveness of the measures used to mitigate and contain it.

And above all we were lied to about the safety and effectiveness of the alleged “vaccine”, the experimental mRNA treatment intended to mitigate the effects of infection with the Wuhan Coronavirus.

Most of the liars who told the official lies could fall back on some sort of plausible deniability, no matter how flimsy, to allow themselves to evade responsibility. “Mistakes were made,” “We didn’t know that at the time,” “It was judged to be the best course of action, based on the available data,” etc.

But that wasn’t the case with the promise that the “vaccine” was safe. There is no plausible deniability for those who confidently asserted the safety of the experimental mRNA treatment.

The vax was not proven to be safe. That was obvious to me from the moment I first heard the government’s reassurances. It didn’t require any special scientific or medical knowledge to determine the falsity of statements that the vax was safe. All that was needed was common sense and the ability to think.

If you look at the history of the development of vaccines prior to the mRNA treatments, you’ll discover that a new vaccine typically takes at least five years, and sometimes ten or even fifteen years, before it is fully tested and approved for use. That’s due to a requirement that clinical trials show the new vaccine’s long-range adverse effects — out as far as five years — remain within acceptable limits.

The clinical testing of the mRNA “vaccines” went on for at most a few months before the treatments were given an emergency use authorization (EUA). In order to get around its own regulations, the government could only issue an EUA, because the requirements for general approval had not been met. It was on the basis of that EUA that millions upon millions of people were injected with an experimental new treatment — making them unwitting test subjects in the largest clinical trial in history.

Now that we’re more than three years in, the results of that clinical trial don’t bode well for the mRNA treatment ever being granted full approval for general distribution. The mountain of evidence for the harm caused by the vax just keeps getting higher and higher, with no end in sight. However, from the point of view of the health authorities and the pharmaceutical companies, it doesn’t really matter, because just about everybody who might decide to take the vax has already been injected with it. Massive amounts of money have been transferred from government coffers to Big Pharma’s bank accounts. Additional lucrative mRNA vaccines for new, improved diseases are in the works, so the future looks rosy for Pfizer and Moderna.

In summary: we were lied to about the vax. But not everybody was actually lying — that is, when they said the vax was safe, they thought that what they said was true. Ordinary citizens thought the vax was safe because their doctors told them it was safe, and they trusted their doctors (that trust has now been severely eroded, but that’s a different story). I assume some of those doctors actually believed it themselves, because they trusted the WHO, CDC, NIH, etc. There’s no excuse for not thinking it through in a similar manner to what I described above. But then, most people, including doctors, have never really learned to think.

Way up at the top of the medical food chain, however, people were lying. Scientists and clinicians who had been trained in the development of vaccines and then moved into the highest levels of administration knew all too well that the experimental mRNA treatment intended to mitigate the effects of infection with the Wuhan Coronavirus could not be said to be safe. But they said it was safe anyway.

They were LYING.

I’m thinking specifically of Anthony Fauci, Deborah Birx, and Rochelle Walensky, but there were many others. They looked the camera in the eye and told the viewing public that the injections they were pushing on them were safe, but they knew it wasn’t true. They knew as well as I did that the safety of the treatments was not yet proven.

But they don’t care. They don’t have to care; they’re Big Medicine.

Continue reading

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 12

Below is the twelfth chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 12: Do I Need The Covid Vaccine?

Governments all around the world displayed an astonishing degree of fanaticism with regard to vaccinating everyone against Covid-19. It was truly mind-boggling to both watch and be part of. Despite the millions of argumentative words generated between pro-vax hysterics and anti-vax sceptics, there are really only three simple questions to be asked about the Covid vaccine:

  • Do I need it?
  • Does it work?
  • Is it safe?

Do I need it?

As I have outlined earlier, there was no lethal pandemic in 2020. The Infection Fatality Rate for Covid-19 was similar to that of influenza, so nobody needed an experimental, Emergency Use Authorisation vaccine at all, let alone the young, healthy, or pregnant.

Somewhat ironically, this was revealed in the drug trials themselves. AstraZeneca stated they “were running out of time” with regard to their vaccine trial and went on to explain this was because they were having great trouble finding anyone who exhibited Covid-19 symptoms, which obviously caused data input problems when it came to comparisons between the vaccinated and unvaccinated trial members.

Continue reading

It’s His Fault! — No, It’s HIS Fault!

Well, I woke up today, and the reports on Butler fiasco just got worse and worse. The evidence for (at best) massive, unbelievable incompetence on the part of the Secret Service keeps coming in, to the point that the Director Chick, a diversity hire named Kimberly Cheatle, has found it expedient to blame local law enforcement for allowing a marksman with a high-powered rifle to gain access to a rooftop with a clear line-of-sight shot at Mr. Trump’s head:

According to MSN:

The Secret Service said local police were supposed to secure the rooftop from which gunman Thomas Matthew Crooks attempted to assassinate former President Donald Trump.

The federal agency noted the area was outside its designated perimeter for protection.

Local Pennsylvania police officers were responsible for securing and patrolling the factory grounds of American Glass Research, situated approximately 130 yards from where Trump spoke on Saturday, Secret Service representative Anthony Guglielmi said, according to the New York Times.

The Secret Service was assigned to oversee the area where Trump’s rally was held, while local police were brought in to support those efforts and ensure security outside the rally site.

Additionally, CNN reported that one of two local counter-sniper teams was supposed to cover the building where the gunman was positioned.

Neighbors living near Butler Farm Show Grounds claimed they never received visits from any law enforcement agencies, local or federal, in the days before or during the rally despite expecting such security measures as part of the operation, according to the New York Post.

The Secret Service said that relying on local law enforcement for support is a common practice when managing event security.

OK, support by local law enforcement, that’s fine. But depending on them to make sure that a crucial rooftop is clear — that’s not their job; it’s the Secret Service’s job.

So now we have the unseemly spectacle of the director of the Secret Service blaming local law enforcement for her agency’s failure to do its job. Which means that they DELEGATED crucial parts of that job to other actors, which in turn violates the statutory definition of their task. Their job is to protect the president, not to delegate the task to someone else.

Even if the local cops messed up, the responsibility for any failure to protect may be laid solely at the feet of the United States Secret Service.

In a normal, rational political system, Ms. Cheatle’s color coordinated epaulettes would already have been ripped from her uniform, and she would have been forced into immediate retirement while being stripped of her pension. She would be lucky to avoid prosecution for dereliction of duty, or whatever the charge would be for the head of a civilian agency.

But it gets worse.

According to The Daily Mail (hat tip Conservative Tree House), there was no Secret Service sniper stationed near Thomas Crooks’ roosting spot because the slope of the roof was considered too steep:

Continue reading

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 11

Below is the eleventh chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 11: Did Lockdowns, Masks & Social Distancing Work?

Lockdowns: No, lockdowns didn’t work. This is simply because there was never such a thing as total lockdown, where every single person remained holed up in their property for months on end. Even if this had happened, it would have had no effect whatsoever on a virus transported in the air we breathe, and in the air all around us all of the time.

It seems to be some kind of middle-class fantasy that the outside world stopped turning in late March 2020. Whilst Charles and Arabella (both BBC executives) hunkered down for the duration, the electrical supply powering their Netflix binge-watching remained in perfect operation, courtesy of horny-handed men shinning up pylons.

Trinkets were delivered to their door by heavily accented men in vans. Food miraculously appeared on their local Waitrose shelves. Whatever their little hearts desired could by magicked up at the click of an iPhone button, after which the working-class scuttled and scurried their errands in a supposedly viral soup to ensure the middle class enjoyed a lockdown life of relaxed contentment.

Above the middle class came the political class who, as we now know, partied hard and partied often. And above them came the billionaire class, who jetted around the world whenever and wherever they wanted. It was really only the middle-class who salaciously locked down and narcissistically assumed the rest of the world locked down with them.

The most glaring example of the whole lockdown hypocrisy/uselessness could be found in the realm of supermarkets, where workers toiled away for the entirety of lockdown. Pretty much everyone went to a supermarket. Those who didn’t simply took advantage of home delivery via a man in a van who, of course, mixed with lots of people between supermarket pick-up to home delivery in upmarket suburbia.

Supermarket workers in the Western world were exposed to 80% plus of all local humanity thronging their stores. Supermarket workers were the ultimate Disease Control Group. Did thousands of them keel over and die from Covid-19? No, they did not. Did thousands of them become very ill? No, they did not.

Unlike the lockdowners, supermarket workers got plenty of exercise, sunshine and fresh air, all of which provide a good defence against viruses. As do Vitamins C/D and zinc. We were never told to make sure we had sufficient vitamins though. Instead, we were told to avoid exercise, sunshine and fresh air. This obvious and medically criminal lunacy should have set alarm bells ringing from the outset.

Continue reading

The Man on the Roof

In his customary pithy fashion, Mark Steyn asks the pertinent question:

Let’s cut to the chase — the US Secret Service: In on it? Or just totally crap?

He then provides an excellent (and witty) analysis of what we know so far about the fiasco at the rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Excerpting it wouldn’t do it justice; go over and read it yourself.

The thing is, more news about the shooter on the roof has been coming in all day since Mr. Steyn posted his notebook item, and none of it makes the Secret Service look any better. First there’s this story from NBC News (hat tip Vox Day):

Rooftop Where Gunman Shot at Trump Was Identified as a Security Vulnerability Before Rally: Sources

The rooftop where a gunman shot at former President Donald Trump during a campaign rally was identified by the Secret Service as a potential vulnerability in the days before the event, two sources familiar with the agency’s operations told NBC News.

The building, owned by a glass research company, is adjacent to the Butler Farm Show, an outdoor venue in Butler, Pennsylvania. The Secret Service was aware of the risks associated with it, the sources said.

“Someone should have been on the roof or securing the building so no one could get on the roof,” said one of the sources, a former senior Secret Service agent who was familiar with the planning.

Understanding how the gunman got onto the roof — despite those concerns — is a central question for investigators scrutinizing how a lone attacker managed to shoot at Trump during Saturday’s campaign event.

[…]

Investigators will want to examine the Secret Service’s site security plan for the rally, said Cangelosi, the former Secret Service agent. He expects they’ll discover one of two things: Either officials failed to make an effective plan for keeping potential shooters off the building Crooks fired from, or officers on the ground failed to execute the plan.

“I don’t like making any assumptions, but it does look like some mistakes were made, that this was preventable,” said Cangelosi, now a lecturer at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

Although it’s common to task local law enforcement agencies with patrolling outside an event’s security perimeter, Cangelosi said, the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that all vulnerabilities are covered rests with the Secret Service. [emphasis added]

This is absolutely clear: The ultimate responsibility for ensuring that all vulnerabilities are covered rests with the Secret Service. Which means that even if local law enforcement screwed up, the Secret Service is responsible for the catastrophic failure that led to President Trump’s Van Gogh ear, a dead fire chief/hero, and two other gravely wounded civilians.

Responsibility, yes. But is it accountable?

One may be forgiven for doubting that anyone with a high level of authority will be held to account. This is, after all, Washington D.C. we’re talking about.

I’ve heard various panjandrums of the Biden administration express their confidence in Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, a diversity hire par excellence. I’m not sure what their confidence is based on — it seems to me that there are two possibilities: either (1) Ms. Cheatle is as massively incompetent as her subordinates who botched the Butler rally, or (2) she has no real control over her agency, and those subordinates acted without her supervision.

Neither of those is a good look.

Chances are, however, the congressional hearings and “independent” investigation will run their course, and Kimberly Cheatle will be given only the mildest of reprimands before being shunted off into some other well-paid high-level sinecure. That’s the way Washington works.

And new black marks against the Secret Service just keep coming in. According to the Pittsburgh TV station WPXI (hat tip Conservative Tree House), local law enforcement were aware of the presence of the man on the roof half an hour before the shooting started:

Continue reading

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 10

Below is the tenth chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 10: Lockdowns

Lockdown was never referred to as “lockdown” in March 2020. We were “asked” to stay at home for a few weeks, thus allowing our health services to get up to speed without being swamped. As we now know, a few weeks became months became 2021.

I simply cannot believe this was not planned. The logistics involved in keeping a country afloat after closing down the economy are extremely complicated. Months — if not years — of planning must have gone into this.

One of the strangest things about the first lockdown in the UK was the enforcement date of March the 26th, just one week after the government declared on March 19th that Covid-19 was being downgraded from a High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID). The reason given for the downgrade was a low mortality rate…

Anyway, the world locked down. When it became apparent the lockdowns were going to stay in place until a miracle vaccine was discovered, the governments promised us detailed cost/benefit analyses would be conducted. They never were. But they very much should have been.

The principal reason they should is all to do with deaths. Closing down the country also meant partially closing down health services to non-Covid patients. Inculcating fear meant many people were too scared to go anywhere near a hospital. Patients with cancer and heart problems stayed away — voluntarily or involuntarily. Many of them died as a result.

On the 19th of July 2020, the Daily Telegraph published an article based on Office for National Statistics figures, claiming two hundred thousand people could die (mid to long term) in the UK due to lockdowns. Similar figures were published in countries all around the world.

Here is a brutal truth. Governments which locked down essentially stated the following: “We are going to murder XYZ thousand people. We undertake this crime because we think we might save other people from Covid-19 deaths.”

Even more remarkably, the death rates were completely normal before lockdowns were initiated. Lockdowns were not the forced result of having to deal with large numbers of deaths. Rather, large numbers of deaths were the forced result of government instructed lockdowns. It is difficult to understand quite why our politicians are not locked up for life after successful prosecution for Crimes Against Humanity.

Continue reading

Our Democracy™: In Counting There is Strength

Electoral fraud is a venerable tradition in these United States, with a history going all the way back to the founding of the Republic.

With control of the public purse, representative government provided lucrative opportunities for both elected officials and the corporations that did business with them. Baroque levels of corruption became the norm, and public policy was devised to maximize profits for all involved while concealing the dirty deals behind a scrim of public rectitude.

Controlling the outcome of elections was essential for the smooth operation of the political machinery, in order to make sure that lucrative enterprises continued to generate lucre for everyone involved. The political cartoon below by Thomas Nast features William M. “Boss” Tweed, the head of Tammany Hall and the most powerful man in New York City in the late 1860s and early 1870s. Boss Tweed was able to guarantee results through an elaborate patronage network, lavish bribery, and his control of the ballot-counting process.

So how has the ballot-counting process evolved in the century and a half since the heyday of Boss Tweed?

There is widespread concern among elite opinion-makers that the current electoral process poses a threat to Our Democracy™. One of the most recent public figures to sound the alarm is Rob “Meathead” Reiner, according to Variety:

“It’s time to stop f***ing around,” Reiner wrote. “If the Convicted Felon wins, we lose our Democracy. Joe Biden has effectively served US with honor, decency, and dignity. It’s time for Joe Biden to step down.”

Whether Joe Biden steps down or not, it’s obviously important to elect the Democrat, whoever that might be. Our Democracy™ is in danger if voters are allowed to vote for the wrong candidate (in this case, Donald Trump). With so much at stake, we must do whatever it takes to ensure the election of the approved candidate.

In my previous posts I highlighted the role that propaganda and the suppression of dissent play in this process. But these alone are not sufficient to guarantee the desired outcome — hence the imperative to control the voting process itself.

This requires a multi-pronged approach. The traditional emptying of the cemeteries to produce votes on election day is still part of the effort. But the implementation of the widespread use of absentee ballots and “mail-in voting” — for which we can thank the Wuhan Coronavirus — created an opportunity for ballot fraud at an unprecedented level. The vote-counting process in major cities is controlled by Democrats, with vestigial or non-existent Republican supervision. The Democrat precinct workers — in most cases part of the African-American political machine — are able to ensure that a reliable supply of ballots marked for the correct candidate can be delivered as needed.

The methodology used to produce the necessary results is complex. To gain a better understanding, I highly recommend Conservative Tree House, where Sundance has done extensive research on the intricacies of the ballot-counting process. Here’s an excerpt from a recent post:

Continue reading

A Little Bit Nutty and a Little Bit Slutty

A German Twitter user got himself into a heap o’ trouble for using an insulting word (nuttig, “slutty”) to describe the outfit worn by a trans “woman” who serves as an MP for the Green Party.

The offending Twitter user is a gay man, but that doesn’t earn him any protection. In the hierarchy of privileged identity politics, “trans” trumps mere homosexuality. As far as I know, the only more privileged category these days is Muslim, which of course trumps everything.

The referenced photograph is so grotesque that I’m not willing to display it here; this is the link to it. In my opinion, “Ms.” Ganserer is too unattractive to be “slutty”. But maybe I’m just a transphobic male chauvinist pig.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from the online news portal Nius. The translator’s comments are in square brackets:

If you call this outfit “slutty”, state security will get in touch

An X user was summoned by the state security service for “insult, slander and defamation against people in political life”. The reason: He had described an outfit that the Green Party MP Tessa Ganserer wore in the Bundestag as “slutty” in a tweet.

It was February when Mike Gick posted the tweet that has now, five months later, led to his being charged with defamation under paragraph 188 of the German Criminal Code.

This is what happened: In February, the AfD member of the Bundestag Martin Reichardt held up a German flag during a speech in the Bundestag. Bundestag President Bärbel Bas then reprimanded Reichardt and imposed a fine of €1,000 on him.

Gick to NIUS: “When I heard that, I was stunned. While Tessa Ganserer is sitting in the Bundestag in an outfit that I could never afford at work without getting into trouble, a call to order is made because a German flag allegedly violates the dignity of the House.” [A government that despises its own national flag has lost, in my eyes, any shred of legitimacy.]

“As a gay man, I don’t feel represented”

He tweeted: “A member of parliament receives a reprimand for holding up the German flag… but when another member of parliament spreads his ideology in the plenary as a man in a slutty women’s outfit, this is apparently perfectly fine with the Bundestag presidium. Germany, quo vadis?”

Gick had already been annoyed by Ganserer’s inappropriate behavior. “As a gay man, I don’t feel represented by what Tessa Ganserer and the queer community are doing. On the contrary: everything that we gays, lesbians and bisexuals have fought for over the years is being trampled on: that we might be seen as normal people.”

Because of this tweet, he is now supposed to appear before the police.

Although the tweet was reported, X has not to date deleted it. Gick to NIUS: “The tweet appears to have been correctly classified as an expression of opinion.”

Continue reading

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. — Chapter 8

Below is the eighth chapter in the serialization of Paul Weston’s book Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime. Previously: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime.

by Paul Weston

Chapter 8: The PCR Fraud

After the deaths driven by the Great Care Home Cull in Spring 2020 fizzled out, the government switched to positive PCR tests to drive the Covid Pandemic. These tests were dishonest and fraudulent.

According to the government’s own research, the average range of false positive test results was 2.3% — which means out of 100,000 tests carried out, 2,300 (2.3% of 100,000) were false (caused by poor testing, storage, dirty instruments etc) and thus should be removed from the data.

If 100,000 tests returned 10,000 positive results, the true positive number would be 7,700 (10,000 positive tests minus 2,300 false positives).

If 100,000 tests returned 2,301 positive results, the true positive is only 1.

If 100,000 tests returned 2,300 positive results, the true positive is zero.

If 100,000 tests returned 2,299 positive results the true positive is minus 1, or in real life data, zero. All minus numbers are effectively zero, no matter how large or small.

Let us look at a typical day in 2020 then. According to the government, 100,664 PCR tests were carried out on 31 May 2020, which returned 1,570 positive results.

For ease of argument, let us call the total number of tests carried out to be exactly 100,000 rather than 100,664.

So, 100,000 tests returned 1,570 positive results. The government claimed 1,570 new Covid-19 cases that day, because they didn’t deduct the 2,300 false positives they should have. If they had, there would have been minus 730 (1,570 minus 2,300) or in real life data, zero.

The 31st of May 2020 was not unusual. Most days during 2020 saw zero new Covid-19 cases if the 2.3% false positive rate had been deducted from the overall positive test result numbers.

The government never deducted it though. To do so would have bought an end to the “pandemic” overnight. Ergo, the government perpetuated the pandemic — for whatever reason — via the fraudulent manipulation of data. The NHS remained closed down as a result, and patients with cancelled cancer treatment or heart operations died as a direct result of criminal, murderous, governmental fraud.

And it gets worse. British Health Secretary Matt Hancock was confronted about the false positives on live TV by Talk Radio’s Julia Hartley-Brewer. Astonishingly, Hancock seemed to be under the impression that the false positive percentage rate should be applied to the positive cases returned, rather than the tests carried out.

If we go back to the PCR tests performed on 21 May 2020 (100,000 tests returning 1,570 positive results) Hancock applied the 2.3% false positive rate to the 1,570 positive results rather than the 100,000 tests.

2.3% of 1,570 equates to 36. So, Hancock subtracted the 36 from the 1,570 and claimed 1,534 true positive test results. As I explained earlier, the true figure was minus 730 (1,570 minus 2,300) or in real life data, zero.

Continue reading

Arguments Arise and Knives Emerge

Two new trends seem to have emerged recently in Europe, and especially in Germany.

The first involves arguments that arise out of nowhere. After their emergence they escalate, and then the second trend kicks in: knives appear. Subsequently, through some mysterious process that is never quite explained in the media, badly wounded people are sent to the hospital, and bloody corpses are left in the street.

For unknown reasons, both trends correlate with the incidence of cultural enrichment in the regions where they occur.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating these two pieces from the online news portal Nius. The translator’s comments are in square brackets.

The first article concerns events in Saxony:

At least four wounded in stabbing spree: Major operation in Plauen

A man was arrested not far from the crime scene. A connection has not yet been confirmed.

  • There was a stabbing in Plauen on Sunday night.
  • Blood splatters covered the entire Tischerstrasse.
  • At least four people were injured, and one person was arrested not far from the crime scene.

On Sunday night (June 30, 2024) there was a stabbing in Plauen (Vogtland district, Saxony). This occurred on Tischerstrasse; blood is splattered all over the street. At least four people were wounded!

(Video)

According to initial police findings, several men got into an argument on a playground shortly after midnight. One of them then pulled out a knife. [I guess that clinched the argument.]

A large police contingent, as well as several ambulances and emergency doctors, arrived.

A man who was arrested later also received medical treatment.

A few minutes later, on Reißiger Straße, a man was arrested. He went ballistic against a garbage can and insulted the police officers.

It is still unclear whether this man is the main suspect in the previous stabbing.

Afterword from the translator:

This, ladies and gentlewomen, is the new normal for and in a “multicultural society”, in which the dregs and sewer-scrapings from utterly hostile cultures have been invited in, and in which every “argument” is settled by violence and sudden death. Well done, and I’m pretty sure that at the next elections there’ll be more of the same voted for by the same imbeciles who have been keeping these old and extremely traitorous political parties in power and who are in the possession of an imaginable “magic” word, applied one-sided only, that turns everyone perceptible into a compliant zombie, and that word is “RACIST”.

The second article describes occurrences in Berlin:

Continue reading

Queer Liberation is Palestinian Liberation

Fredericton is the capital of New Brunswick. I guess it’s no surprise that a kind-hearted Canadian city such as Fredericton would have a thriving Queer community. Nor is it a surprise that the city would show solidarity with the liberation of Palestine.

Those two beneficent movements have joined forces this summer: Fredericton Palestine Solidarity has the honor of being Grand Marshal for the Pride Parade. Perhaps participants will gather afterwards for a gala rooftop celebration, just to make it easy and convenient for the Hamas supporters to engage in their customary activities.

No further comment is needed:

2024 Grand Marshal Announcement

Fierté Fredericton Pride is happy to announce that Fredericton Palestine Solidarity is our Grand Marshal for our Pride Parade taking place on Sunday, July 21st at 3pm.

We believe, as Fredericton Palestine Solidarity does, that queer liberation is Palestinian liberation.

We have taken the following actions to show our solidarity and support for Palestine and our Grand Marshal.

Fierté Fredericton Pride will not be accepting any sponsorships from businesses or organizations listed on the Canadian BDS Coalitions website. This extends to arms manufacturers as well.

We have also made the decision to refuse banks and other businesses listed on the Canadian BDS Coalitions site from marching in the parade. Military and arms manufacturers likewise are not permitted to walk in the parade.

Though UNB is not included on the BDS list, Fierté Fredericton Pride stands in solidarity with UNB students, faculty, alumni and staff activists asking for the university to disclose and divest from all Israeli investments and partnerships, as well as those with any arms manufacturers. As such, UNB as an institution is not welcome to march in the parade, but student organizations (sports teams included) are welcome to participate.

In terms of programming, we are hosting a panel on Queer Liberation and Decolonization featuring queer Palestinian panelist May (Queers for Palestine TO) on Wednesday, July 17 at 8:30pm via Zoom webinar.

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.

“The Chamber is Already Full of Devils”

Last night’s debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden has fully occupied the memespace of the Internet. Everybody is discussing it, especially the talking heads of the MSM, but also all the pundits and bloggers and social media mavens.

I’m staying away from it as much as possible. One of the main reasons is that it is all so deeply, deeply insane. It’s disturbing, and comic, and demonic, all rolled into one.

I feel like I’m living in a planet-wide madhouse. And if I watch too much of this stuff, I’ll get sucked into the vortex of lunacy myself, and never find my way out.

So I won’t be blogging debate-related matters. There will be items about it in the news feed, and I recommend Conservative Tree House for comprehensive coverage. This post is especially interesting. Power Line is also doing in-depth analysis.

This brief snip from Mark Steyn fully aligns with my own take on what’s really going on:

You have to figure that that’s greatly to the advantage of the Deep State, and that’s why they’d like to keep it that way. It’s quite something to teach the people the lesson that representative politics is just a meaningless joke, third-rate dinner-theatre in which all the faux-combat is an obvious sham. In the Soviet Union, the point wasn’t to persuade you to believe the lie but to force you to live with the lie. Reducing the two-year US election cycle to the same state inflicts an even more brutal humiliation on the masses.

So why weren’t they able, after a week-and-a-half of dosage experimentation, to shoot the stiff enough of the juice to pass him off as being back in his State of the Union top-of-the-game mode?

As my former GB News colleague Neil Oliver observed long ago on The Mark Steyn Show, formulating a useful rule of contemporary politics:

This is happening because they want it to happen.

Enricher vs. Enricher in Solingen

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Junge Freiheit:

Perpetrator sets himself on fire

Many injured in attack in Solingen

Incredible scenes in the middle of Solingen: According to witnesses, an apparently African man tried to storm a bar that was said to belong to a large Arab family. Then there was an explosion. Large parts of the city center were cordoned off.

Solingen

At least six people, including the attacker, were injured, some seriously, in an arson attack in Solingen. Photos on social media show the attacker, who appears to be an African, with severe burns.

According to a report in the Bild newspaper, he is said to have thrown a bomb-like object into an arcade in the city center, which is said to belong to a large Arab family. According to WDR, an anti-clan raid took place in the building two years ago. According to police, nothing is known about the background to the incident. The security forces and the fire brigade are on-site in large numbers. The attack is said to have taken place shortly after 2 p.m.

An eyewitness told the newspaper: “He pulled something out of the front of his trousers. It looked like an explosive device. Then he probably accidentally spilled a liquid, then there was a big bang and the man was on fire. Witnesses then put out the fire and provided first aid.” Large parts of Solingen’s city center are cordoned off.

Afterword from the translator:

Continue reading