“They even counseled the President of the United States with this false information, who then went on national television to tell the American people that it was their duty, their obligation to get vaccinated in order to stop transmission of this deadly virus. ”
No. I knew the vaccines weren’t tested for transmission as did millions of people. That information was publicly available and many independent journalists were reporting on it. If I knew, Biden knew. He knew and he lied.
Remember his Christmas 2021 address when he said
“For th unvaccinated you’re looking at a winter of severe illness and death for you, your loved ones and the hospitals you may soon overwhelm?” He knew the truth then and yet he wished death on us for not complying.
Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I believe Presidents put key people into key position whom they trust. These are people with decades of experience in their chosen fields. They then listen to their counsel but ultimately make their own decision, typically based on the knowledge of their trusted high level officials. I believe this is true regarding military actions or public health decisions for example. I don't believe any President is an expert in either field along with countless other critical fields. If they are given inaccurate information, I don't believe that means that they have intentionally made decisions to harm people. Are there some Presidents who flagrantly made decisions that he knew may hurt the public. Yes, we have had narcissistic Presidents. Personally , I do not believe Biden had nefarious intent regarding Covid. One can review his decades long career in public service. Did he make some bad calls. Yes he did. Overall, he appears, to me, to care about the American people.
Well, his extreme reaction might not have been nefarious. It might have been (I’m not ruling anything out) but it also could have been fueled by an incurious mind and lack of critical thinking skills.
The fact is that he pushed the vaccines through unprecedented mandates, guilt, shame, and fear. He did those awful things either for nefarious reasons or because he lacks critical thinking skills and is easily manipulated by people who have nefarious intentions …
Either way IMO he’s not a good leader. He’s a dangerous leader. What mess might someone like that get us into next?
And he hasn’t acknowledged his mistake. In fact, his administration fought to maintain mandates for military and civilian federal workers and contractors rather than removing the mandates even after it was impossible to ignore they weren’t working.
Everyone who pushed vaccines needs to be held accountable for their actions. That goes for people who pushed mask mandates and lockdowns too.
I’d love to see some introspection from those people. Why did they believe the lies? Without introspection people will be fooled again. The powers that be will always lie. Democrat or republican.
Thanks. I am proud to be accepted as a "journalist" on that important platform. Trial Site News has been transparently reporting on all thing Covid for over 2 years now. Can you imagine where our country would be IF all respected, legitimate news organizations and medical journals reported the unvarnished truth? If the public had received that accurate information, we would be in a much different place today, here at home and around the globe.
This is what we are up against: OCPD. It's a big part of the reason for the bureaupathology of the vaccine traffickers:
Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD), which is common in the military, where those with the condition tend to be rapidly promoted (e.g., Colonel Russell Williams, convicted serial killer and former Commanding Officer of Canada's largest airforce base), law enforcement (e. g., Derek Chauvin, Idaho killings suspect Bryan Kohberger), academia, the judiciary, educators and serial killers appears also to be common in public health bureaucrats. OCPD is a disorder of overcontrol. When dialled up, it's similar to psychopathy, with which it is often comorbid.
It's characterised by, among other things, self-righteousness, tyrannical or dictatorial tendencies, perfectionism (especially WRT expectations of others), neatness ("serial killer neat"), punctuality, the ability to dial down or turn off empathy, perspective shifting deficits, rigidity, overconscientious and enjoyment of creating fear in subordinates. It has links to sadism.
People with the condition are functionally rigid, stubborn and tend to think they are "always right" and that there is only one correct way of doing things, which is their way. Hitler and Ghandi are good examples. They are angered when they don't get their own way and are overconcerned with ethics and morality. (Hitler was vegetarian and Bryan Kohberger is vegan.)
OCPD individuals are annoyed when proven to be wrong and they double down on their mistakes. Because of their perspective shifting deficits they have trouble with alternative hypothesis generation and are unsuited to be scientists. They are also unsuited for management roles and unsuited to be public health bureaucrats although, due to attention to detail, can make good accountants.
A big part of their problem is their perspective taking deficits and cognitive distortions and fallacies in their reasoning. They can do well on tasks requiring attention to detail but they can't readily adjust their perspective to identify and correct for weaknesses in theory or methodology.
They tend to rise to the top in ethics councils, professional associations, regulatory bodies and the military as well as, it appears, the public health bureaucracy.
Present them with evidence of vaccine harms and individuals with OCPD can't adjust their perspective or admit their mistakes and instead they just double down, and then seek revenge. Because it's an egosyntonic disorder they have no idea of how f-cked up they are and how much harm they cause.
To further understand OCPD, consider the following description of Anthony Fauci by Scott Sturman M.D:
"The mindset of Field Marshal Douglas Haig, World War I’s worst general, springs to mind, when drawing a comparison to Anthony Fauci. By some historical accounts Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig bears the distinction of WWI’s worst general. He rose to Commander of British Expeditionary Forces and led Allied armies during the slaughter and futility at the battles of the Somme and Passchendaele. Known for his self confidence and inflexibility, he repeatedly ordered soldiers over the top to “no man’s land” and into the path of German machine guns. No number of casualties or unachieved objectives could dissuade him from his singular approach to combat. Nigel Davies, historian and educator, points out that General Haig was emblematic of the chateau general - dictating and directing but far removed from the battlefield: They were Chateau Generals in approach and in attitude. They drew lines on maps without adequately considering the terrain, issued impossible instructions without looking at the state of the ground, and ran completely inadequate communications that were far from capable of keeping track of, or controlling, a modern battlefield. In a similar respect, despite his academic and professional accomplishments, Dr. Anthony Fauci has no background or experience in clinical medicine and is ill equipped to lead the SARS-CoV-2 response. His purview is that of a research scientist and entrenched bureaucrat, who is far removed from patient contact. His career is enmeshed with the pharmaceutical industry, whose financial ties with federal medical regulatory institutions are well described. Throughout his career he has denied patients easily accessible, inexpensive, and effective treatments in lieu of patented medications with high risk profiles and of dubious efficacy. In 1987 despite overwhelming clinical evidence, he told AIDS activists that the prophylactic use of the common antibiotic Bactrim to treat pneumocystis carnii pneumonia was ineffective and possibly dangerous. Through private donations the company Lymphomed circumvented the NIAID and conducted successful clinical trials. The delay cost the lives of nearly 17,000 immunocompromised patients."
I think you meant to type OCPD but missed the P, which is a good sign of not being a 'compulsive.' OCD and OCPD are often comorbid but not always. It's definitely shaped by environment as well as genes and there are neurodevelopmental underpinnings. It's not clear that OCPD is properly classified as a personality disorder. There's a correlation with being on the autism spectrum but it's not always obvious and there is a complex correlations hip with ADHD. Patricia Krenwinkel from the Manson family was diagnosed with OCPD. Quite a few have comorbid eating disorders. Media descriptions from people who know him of Bryan Kohberger have included that he has "OCD eating tendencies" because he insisted that his parents throw out pots and pans that had ever cooked meat after he became vegan but that looks to me to be more likely reflecting his overconcern with ethics and morality. I have no idea whether or not he is guilty but there is a lot of other information about him that fits with OCPD. An Australian serial killer, Bradley Edwards, the "Claremont serial killer" is a classic OCPD. It took 20 years to catch him. He was a telecommunications technician, known for his diligence, work ethic and punctuality etc but he was also a vile, cruel murderer. It's disturbing to think that many of our top bureaucrats and vaccine advocates share the disorder. A good quick screen as to whether or not someone may be a compulsive is to ask them to tell you a joke. If they struggle to come up with one you could be dealing with a compulsive. The lack of humour appears to be related to abnormalities in the mirror neurons.
Mis-information can be provided intentionally, or accidently...As it did Once Upon A Time...
There's no need for dis-information is bad, mis-information is unintentional...
Dictionaries describe, they dont prescribe...That is, they record the common uses of a word, they dont set meaning in stone...(Until the internet, the common uses were mostly culled from print media)...
The term dis-information allegedly was coined by Uncle Joe Stalin. of the Soviet Union ..It was the name he allegedly gave to any (espionage) campaign that was similar to and run parallel to an actual (espionage) campaign, the intention of which was to confuse the enemy...To confuse, to cause doubt undermines the enemy's ability to react...
The term began to enter popular usage via press reports in early 1980s, via mention of its use by US intelligence agencies to explain Perestroika & Glasnost in USSR...
Once a term is taken up by the corporate propaganda media (MSM), not known for rigorous adhesion to definitions in their uses of words, the meaning of a word is decided by them...(Propaganda does not like clearly defined words...It likes meanings to be malleable...Meanings shift to fit the political uses to which they are put)...
For a dis-information campaign whether a fact is true or false is irrelevant...Even true facts can be used to create the doubt necessary to undermine any effective action...
I believe the term is an umbrella term, yet undefinable...In line with what Humpty Dumpty told Alice "It means whatever the corporate propaganda media (MSM) want it to mean."
And dictionaries have taken the easy way out, merely noting it means 'intentional mis-information'...
The dam is starting to break. Today, the Wall Street Journal published an article accusing "the experts" of spreading misinformation, and sharing evidence that the vax campaign has driven the rise of COVID variants.
WOW - that is dam good news. Thanks Lex. Hopefully this will be followed by yet more damning evidence finally reported by mainstream media. On one level, it's a bit too late to have saved so many lives that have been destroyed but ultimately, better late than never!
It's also important to understand the role that linguistics have played in this ongoing horror show. Many terms from the medical community have been recrafted to obfuscate the truth.
1 - "Cases" - the inference that PCR tests report infections in a community.
Whereas the term cases has no true medical definition, at least not before 2020. Viral infection prior to 2020 was understood to require both presence of virus detected AND replication of said virus. Presence alone known to be of little concern, especially at high amplification from a tool that detects dinosaur DNA in fossils, not live dinosaurs. Cases. Chosen by linguists to amplify fear of infectious outbreaks in a community, not actual outbreaks.
And when the NYT reported PCR result in 90-95% false positives in August, 2020 quoting medical experts who were shocked upon learning the real results, I thought surely public policymakers would make changes, reduce reported numbers accordingly, 10,000 cases would be reported as 1,000 infections.
But they didn't. And continued their fear amplification as their chosen Behavioral Science-based Nonpharmaceutical Intervention strategy. Even though that good news discovery would've been acknowledged under the ethical guardrails on the practice of behaviorism.
Some Scandinavian nations used PCR tests differently to determine infections. In addition to detecting presence, the second part test of the medical definition of viral infection, replication needed to be detected.
There the more expensive and slower blood tests that health authorities rarely use were cleverly approximated by many of our Scandinavian friends by applying a two-test PCR protocol. Where a second test was performed six hours after the first, then results compared. If virus was detected with fewer amplification cycles on the second test then they could infer the virus was replicating, if more amplifications were needed to detect they could infer it was diminishing, no more infection as it was being cleared by the body's immune system.
This checked the other box on the clinical definition of infection, replication. Why didn't the US and other western nations adopt the two-test protocol? They claimed it's too expensive...while they provide unlimited free tests. And that people wouldn't come back for a second test six hours later.
As if the expense and inconvenience to society of two tests and six hours was lower than two weeks of quarantining masses of people. "Cases." A fake, phony and false term, linguistic deception to amplify fear, the chosen pandemic NPI.
2 - "Breakthrough Infection" - the inference that a person who was vaccinated encountered an especially virulent virus that evaded the protection of the vaccine.
Whereas the term didn't exist in virology prior to 2020. If someone became infected from the same virus family they had been vaccinated against the industry deemed it "vaccine failure."
These "experts" did the classic blame-shift technique that abusers use. It wasn't the fault of the "proven safe and effective" vaccines, it was the fault of the unvaxxed for propagating an especially virulent virus. Or the virus had innate shape-shifting ability, genetically engineered to avoid control.
"Breakthrough infection." Another fake, phoney and false term, linguistic deception to absolve health authorities and Big Pharma from blame for pushing a knowingly and observably failed vaccine on entire populations. And shifting blame, othering the selfish noncompliant, the disobedient.
3 - Placebo Masks. This linguistic trickery is derived by the elimination of a word to deceive. Prior to 2020 most masks worn in health care facilities were called placebo masks. With the exception of N95 and other highly restricted airflow masks used in specific types of surgeries, masks were worn by personnel as a visual placebo for patients and visitors who were fearful of germs in a sick environment.
While they were known to have little to no medical efficacy preventing most infections they gave many uninformed and frightened people psychological comfort to overcome their fear. They had a placebo effect. Hence the term.
In providing that placebo effect the wearer of the placebo mask was required to follow strict mask safety protocols. Because the risk of masking was known to be the wearer's. Charts were posted in employee areas showing proper donning and doffing techniques, only touching the straps, not touching faces to adjust, wearing for short durations, moist and discolored masks discarded properly, etc.
Medical personnel were even observed by safety officials to make sure proper mask safety protocols were being observed. Trained medical professionals had to be constantly reminded. And HCF's kept Infection Control Logs, frequently noting improper mask safety resulted in self-infection.
All one has to do is look at how the untrained general public masks to know that self-infection frequently occurs in the community. Most with strong enough immune systems to defeat serious infection. Until they finally get overwhelmed by constant exposure to the petri dish pathogens in front of their mouth and nose they inhale over and over.
Placebo masks. Falsely promoted as protective. And safe for the general public wearer without following protocols that trained professionals need reminding. Fake, phoney and false linguistic deception by omission.
And the reality of community masking outside a HCF actually serves the behavioral science NPI of fear amplification, masked faces in public trigger the amygdala fight, flight or freeze response, equivalent to seeing a snake - studies I've shared previously on Michelle's Substack.
The pandemic has been a pandemic of linguistic deceptions, all designed to amplify fear at the same time authorities shift blame for their failures onto the disobedient. History offers many lessons on what type of government does these things. Like the mass murderous ones of the 20th century. Sames. Evil needs lies and deception to prevail.
Thanks once again for taking the time to share this important information. It breaks my heart a bit each time I'm confronted by yet more fraud and disinformation. Will it ever stop? I wish, on this first day of the new year, that I had some concrete answers or words of wisdom to share. Unfortunately, the well is dry.
Shared previously - the science of masks for pandemic NPI. Behavioral science. Not medical science. Psychology. Fear amplification in community settings (as opposed to health facilities where people are understandably, but unscientifically, fearful of germs and infections) to keep people apart from one another, ostensibly to "slow the spread" of a virus - that is already widespread by the time it is detected in a community.
This study explains why masked faces evoke fear in people (pre-pandemic used by bank robbers and plane hijackers.) Banned for that reason. Pre-pandemic. Here's the scientific background on the importance of faces, visible expressions, for a healthy society and healthy social interactions. A healthy society requires faces be seen. Not just eyes. Full facial expressions are an essential form of human communication and stabilizes society. And perhaps most importantly, human aggression is moderated by full faces.
Of snakes and faces: An evolutionary perspective on the psychology of fear. (2009)
"In 1972, Ekman published cross-cultural data that shifted the at the time accepted view that facial expression, like other social gestures, reflected mere cultural convention, into the Darwinian (Darwin, 1872/1998) tenet that expressions of emotion in the human face represent biologically evolved adaptations. Anger, for example, is a threat signal potentially related to harmful intent, whereas a smile is the opposite, a reassuring signal of friendly affiliation. Against this background, Öhman and Dimberg (1978) invoked the preparedness theory to predict that an angry face should be more easily conditioned to an aversive US than should a happy face."
"The survival premium of astute detection of subtle cues given off by predators shaped a highly sensitive visual system that later proved useful in the social arena with the expanding social life of anthropoid primates. For example, the sensitivity for danger cues promoted vigilance for early detection of stimuli that announced potential aggressive encounters in social conflicts. It is a fascinating fact that the forebrain structures that have expanded most in size during primate evolution not only include – as we all know – the prefrontal cortex, but also the amygdala. Furthermore, it appears that the enlargement of these two structures was linked, both of them driven by group size (Barton & Aggleton, 2000). The prefrontal link is important because it allows inhibitory modulation of the amygdala, thus promoting strategic cognitive control of the expression of fear..."
"The prefrontal influence on facial as well as other channels of emotional expression helps to maintain conflicts at a symbolic level, where the relative strength of the combatants can be evaluated from more or less convincing displays of power and submissiveness, which prevents escalating the conflict into an actual fight that might result in injuries to the participants.
A substantial part of the signaling action in conflicts between individuals centers on the faces of the parties measuring their relative strength. As recognized by Darwin (1872/1998), the design of the face suggests that it has evolved as a means of communication. The facial muscles are unique in their function by primarily moving dermal tissue rather than body limbs, producing coordinated changes in the visual appearance of the face. The basic human facial displays are similar to those of other primates, but the human face has a more complex musculature than that of other primates, with a more versatile neural innervation, suggesting that the human ability to communicate by the face is better developed than that of our primate relatives..."
I believe fear porn played a significant role in getting the general public to comply. I believe it was deliberate. I look forward to those, who used these psychological principles to influence the behavior of the public., to be accountable for their actions.
I've spent a great deal of time researching and studying the ethics of coercive and manipulative behavioral science. The ethics of deception. There is such a thing, wouldn't you know. They were obliterated during the pandemic. The ethical guardrails of psychological manipulation were blown right through as though they didn't exist.
There are many principles in these ethics, not the least of which is the recognition of good news that allows authorities to relax and soften their methods of coercion and manipulation. In order to maintain the trust and good faith of the target population. As good information was presented, like the PCR test "cases" overstating actual infections by 90-95%. It wasn't accounted for, instead authorities double-downed and invested more of their authority into perpetuating that deception. Ethical failure, forfeiting future public trust for short-term agendas.
Do you know the only ethical restriction on authorities lying to, deceiving the public? If the lie and deception can be detected by an intelligent and educated person. That's it. That's the ethical test. As long as the lie, deception isn't imperceptible to an intelligent and educated person, as is the case with subliminal messaging, it is within the ethics of authorities lying to and deceiving the public. Which means that as we, the educated and intelligent people, detect the lies and deceptions and begin sharing them with one another the behavioral scientists pat themselves on their backs knowing that they stand within their ethics, our complaints are proof-positive. "Heads we win, Tails you lose." Nice set of ethics, huh?
When you go down the rabbit hole of the ethical deployment of behavioral science psychology-based campaigns made by authorities, even in public emergencies, there's a whole lot to discover. And realize that the very ethics that the field proclaims allow them to stand in their integrity were/are being obliterated under pretense of public health emergencies. The field has gone rogue. At the direction of power-hungry authoritarians. The ethical guardrails treated as mere suggestions, sped over like small speed bumps on the expressway to a permanent totalitarian global government. By the arrogant and cruel who believe the ends of their pursuits justify the means of achieving them.
"Taking Soviet propaganda at face value this way was completely misleading, as talking with ordinary Russians might have revealed even at the time. Duranty’s prize-winning articles quoted not a single one – only Stalin, who forced farmers all over the Soviet Union into collective farms and sent those who resisted to concentration camps. Collectivization was the main cause of a famine that killed millions of people in Ukraine, the Soviet breadbasket, in 1932 and 1933 – two years after Duranty won his prize.
Even then, Duranty dismissed more diligent writers’ reports that people were starving. “Conditions are bad, but there is no famine,” he wrote in a dispatch from Moscow in March of 1933 describing the “mess” of collectivization. “But – to put it brutally – you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.”"
“They even counseled the President of the United States with this false information, who then went on national television to tell the American people that it was their duty, their obligation to get vaccinated in order to stop transmission of this deadly virus. ”
No. I knew the vaccines weren’t tested for transmission as did millions of people. That information was publicly available and many independent journalists were reporting on it. If I knew, Biden knew. He knew and he lied.
Remember his Christmas 2021 address when he said
“For th unvaccinated you’re looking at a winter of severe illness and death for you, your loved ones and the hospitals you may soon overwhelm?” He knew the truth then and yet he wished death on us for not complying.
Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I believe Presidents put key people into key position whom they trust. These are people with decades of experience in their chosen fields. They then listen to their counsel but ultimately make their own decision, typically based on the knowledge of their trusted high level officials. I believe this is true regarding military actions or public health decisions for example. I don't believe any President is an expert in either field along with countless other critical fields. If they are given inaccurate information, I don't believe that means that they have intentionally made decisions to harm people. Are there some Presidents who flagrantly made decisions that he knew may hurt the public. Yes, we have had narcissistic Presidents. Personally , I do not believe Biden had nefarious intent regarding Covid. One can review his decades long career in public service. Did he make some bad calls. Yes he did. Overall, he appears, to me, to care about the American people.
Well, his extreme reaction might not have been nefarious. It might have been (I’m not ruling anything out) but it also could have been fueled by an incurious mind and lack of critical thinking skills.
The fact is that he pushed the vaccines through unprecedented mandates, guilt, shame, and fear. He did those awful things either for nefarious reasons or because he lacks critical thinking skills and is easily manipulated by people who have nefarious intentions …
Either way IMO he’s not a good leader. He’s a dangerous leader. What mess might someone like that get us into next?
And he hasn’t acknowledged his mistake. In fact, his administration fought to maintain mandates for military and civilian federal workers and contractors rather than removing the mandates even after it was impossible to ignore they weren’t working.
Everyone who pushed vaccines needs to be held accountable for their actions. That goes for people who pushed mask mandates and lockdowns too.
I’d love to see some introspection from those people. Why did they believe the lies? Without introspection people will be fooled again. The powers that be will always lie. Democrat or republican.
Excellent analysis well written, Michelle! And congratulations on your debut on Trial Site News!
This is a great article, but I’ve already read it on Trial Site News! Congratulations on getting published there as well.
Thanks. I am proud to be accepted as a "journalist" on that important platform. Trial Site News has been transparently reporting on all thing Covid for over 2 years now. Can you imagine where our country would be IF all respected, legitimate news organizations and medical journals reported the unvarnished truth? If the public had received that accurate information, we would be in a much different place today, here at home and around the globe.
This is what we are up against: OCPD. It's a big part of the reason for the bureaupathology of the vaccine traffickers:
Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD), which is common in the military, where those with the condition tend to be rapidly promoted (e.g., Colonel Russell Williams, convicted serial killer and former Commanding Officer of Canada's largest airforce base), law enforcement (e. g., Derek Chauvin, Idaho killings suspect Bryan Kohberger), academia, the judiciary, educators and serial killers appears also to be common in public health bureaucrats. OCPD is a disorder of overcontrol. When dialled up, it's similar to psychopathy, with which it is often comorbid.
It's characterised by, among other things, self-righteousness, tyrannical or dictatorial tendencies, perfectionism (especially WRT expectations of others), neatness ("serial killer neat"), punctuality, the ability to dial down or turn off empathy, perspective shifting deficits, rigidity, overconscientious and enjoyment of creating fear in subordinates. It has links to sadism.
People with the condition are functionally rigid, stubborn and tend to think they are "always right" and that there is only one correct way of doing things, which is their way. Hitler and Ghandi are good examples. They are angered when they don't get their own way and are overconcerned with ethics and morality. (Hitler was vegetarian and Bryan Kohberger is vegan.)
OCPD individuals are annoyed when proven to be wrong and they double down on their mistakes. Because of their perspective shifting deficits they have trouble with alternative hypothesis generation and are unsuited to be scientists. They are also unsuited for management roles and unsuited to be public health bureaucrats although, due to attention to detail, can make good accountants.
A big part of their problem is their perspective taking deficits and cognitive distortions and fallacies in their reasoning. They can do well on tasks requiring attention to detail but they can't readily adjust their perspective to identify and correct for weaknesses in theory or methodology.
They tend to rise to the top in ethics councils, professional associations, regulatory bodies and the military as well as, it appears, the public health bureaucracy.
Present them with evidence of vaccine harms and individuals with OCPD can't adjust their perspective or admit their mistakes and instead they just double down, and then seek revenge. Because it's an egosyntonic disorder they have no idea of how f-cked up they are and how much harm they cause.
To further understand OCPD, consider the following description of Anthony Fauci by Scott Sturman M.D:
"The mindset of Field Marshal Douglas Haig, World War I’s worst general, springs to mind, when drawing a comparison to Anthony Fauci. By some historical accounts Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig bears the distinction of WWI’s worst general. He rose to Commander of British Expeditionary Forces and led Allied armies during the slaughter and futility at the battles of the Somme and Passchendaele. Known for his self confidence and inflexibility, he repeatedly ordered soldiers over the top to “no man’s land” and into the path of German machine guns. No number of casualties or unachieved objectives could dissuade him from his singular approach to combat. Nigel Davies, historian and educator, points out that General Haig was emblematic of the chateau general - dictating and directing but far removed from the battlefield: They were Chateau Generals in approach and in attitude. They drew lines on maps without adequately considering the terrain, issued impossible instructions without looking at the state of the ground, and ran completely inadequate communications that were far from capable of keeping track of, or controlling, a modern battlefield. In a similar respect, despite his academic and professional accomplishments, Dr. Anthony Fauci has no background or experience in clinical medicine and is ill equipped to lead the SARS-CoV-2 response. His purview is that of a research scientist and entrenched bureaucrat, who is far removed from patient contact. His career is enmeshed with the pharmaceutical industry, whose financial ties with federal medical regulatory institutions are well described. Throughout his career he has denied patients easily accessible, inexpensive, and effective treatments in lieu of patented medications with high risk profiles and of dubious efficacy. In 1987 despite overwhelming clinical evidence, he told AIDS activists that the prophylactic use of the common antibiotic Bactrim to treat pneumocystis carnii pneumonia was ineffective and possibly dangerous. Through private donations the company Lymphomed circumvented the NIAID and conducted successful clinical trials. The delay cost the lives of nearly 17,000 immunocompromised patients."
Very interesting. I'll have to give that some thought. I had never looked at OCD in that light before.
I think you meant to type OCPD but missed the P, which is a good sign of not being a 'compulsive.' OCD and OCPD are often comorbid but not always. It's definitely shaped by environment as well as genes and there are neurodevelopmental underpinnings. It's not clear that OCPD is properly classified as a personality disorder. There's a correlation with being on the autism spectrum but it's not always obvious and there is a complex correlations hip with ADHD. Patricia Krenwinkel from the Manson family was diagnosed with OCPD. Quite a few have comorbid eating disorders. Media descriptions from people who know him of Bryan Kohberger have included that he has "OCD eating tendencies" because he insisted that his parents throw out pots and pans that had ever cooked meat after he became vegan but that looks to me to be more likely reflecting his overconcern with ethics and morality. I have no idea whether or not he is guilty but there is a lot of other information about him that fits with OCPD. An Australian serial killer, Bradley Edwards, the "Claremont serial killer" is a classic OCPD. It took 20 years to catch him. He was a telecommunications technician, known for his diligence, work ethic and punctuality etc but he was also a vile, cruel murderer. It's disturbing to think that many of our top bureaucrats and vaccine advocates share the disorder. A good quick screen as to whether or not someone may be a compulsive is to ask them to tell you a joke. If they struggle to come up with one you could be dealing with a compulsive. The lack of humour appears to be related to abnormalities in the mirror neurons.
Mis-information can be provided intentionally, or accidently...As it did Once Upon A Time...
There's no need for dis-information is bad, mis-information is unintentional...
Dictionaries describe, they dont prescribe...That is, they record the common uses of a word, they dont set meaning in stone...(Until the internet, the common uses were mostly culled from print media)...
The term dis-information allegedly was coined by Uncle Joe Stalin. of the Soviet Union ..It was the name he allegedly gave to any (espionage) campaign that was similar to and run parallel to an actual (espionage) campaign, the intention of which was to confuse the enemy...To confuse, to cause doubt undermines the enemy's ability to react...
The term began to enter popular usage via press reports in early 1980s, via mention of its use by US intelligence agencies to explain Perestroika & Glasnost in USSR...
Once a term is taken up by the corporate propaganda media (MSM), not known for rigorous adhesion to definitions in their uses of words, the meaning of a word is decided by them...(Propaganda does not like clearly defined words...It likes meanings to be malleable...Meanings shift to fit the political uses to which they are put)...
For a dis-information campaign whether a fact is true or false is irrelevant...Even true facts can be used to create the doubt necessary to undermine any effective action...
I believe the term is an umbrella term, yet undefinable...In line with what Humpty Dumpty told Alice "It means whatever the corporate propaganda media (MSM) want it to mean."
And dictionaries have taken the easy way out, merely noting it means 'intentional mis-information'...
The dam is starting to break. Today, the Wall Street Journal published an article accusing "the experts" of spreading misinformation, and sharing evidence that the vax campaign has driven the rise of COVID variants.
https://open.substack.com/pub/dystopianliving/p/wall-street-journal-vax-drives-variants
WOW - that is dam good news. Thanks Lex. Hopefully this will be followed by yet more damning evidence finally reported by mainstream media. On one level, it's a bit too late to have saved so many lives that have been destroyed but ultimately, better late than never!
It's also important to understand the role that linguistics have played in this ongoing horror show. Many terms from the medical community have been recrafted to obfuscate the truth.
1 - "Cases" - the inference that PCR tests report infections in a community.
Whereas the term cases has no true medical definition, at least not before 2020. Viral infection prior to 2020 was understood to require both presence of virus detected AND replication of said virus. Presence alone known to be of little concern, especially at high amplification from a tool that detects dinosaur DNA in fossils, not live dinosaurs. Cases. Chosen by linguists to amplify fear of infectious outbreaks in a community, not actual outbreaks.
And when the NYT reported PCR result in 90-95% false positives in August, 2020 quoting medical experts who were shocked upon learning the real results, I thought surely public policymakers would make changes, reduce reported numbers accordingly, 10,000 cases would be reported as 1,000 infections.
But they didn't. And continued their fear amplification as their chosen Behavioral Science-based Nonpharmaceutical Intervention strategy. Even though that good news discovery would've been acknowledged under the ethical guardrails on the practice of behaviorism.
Some Scandinavian nations used PCR tests differently to determine infections. In addition to detecting presence, the second part test of the medical definition of viral infection, replication needed to be detected.
There the more expensive and slower blood tests that health authorities rarely use were cleverly approximated by many of our Scandinavian friends by applying a two-test PCR protocol. Where a second test was performed six hours after the first, then results compared. If virus was detected with fewer amplification cycles on the second test then they could infer the virus was replicating, if more amplifications were needed to detect they could infer it was diminishing, no more infection as it was being cleared by the body's immune system.
This checked the other box on the clinical definition of infection, replication. Why didn't the US and other western nations adopt the two-test protocol? They claimed it's too expensive...while they provide unlimited free tests. And that people wouldn't come back for a second test six hours later.
As if the expense and inconvenience to society of two tests and six hours was lower than two weeks of quarantining masses of people. "Cases." A fake, phony and false term, linguistic deception to amplify fear, the chosen pandemic NPI.
2 - "Breakthrough Infection" - the inference that a person who was vaccinated encountered an especially virulent virus that evaded the protection of the vaccine.
Whereas the term didn't exist in virology prior to 2020. If someone became infected from the same virus family they had been vaccinated against the industry deemed it "vaccine failure."
These "experts" did the classic blame-shift technique that abusers use. It wasn't the fault of the "proven safe and effective" vaccines, it was the fault of the unvaxxed for propagating an especially virulent virus. Or the virus had innate shape-shifting ability, genetically engineered to avoid control.
"Breakthrough infection." Another fake, phoney and false term, linguistic deception to absolve health authorities and Big Pharma from blame for pushing a knowingly and observably failed vaccine on entire populations. And shifting blame, othering the selfish noncompliant, the disobedient.
3 - Placebo Masks. This linguistic trickery is derived by the elimination of a word to deceive. Prior to 2020 most masks worn in health care facilities were called placebo masks. With the exception of N95 and other highly restricted airflow masks used in specific types of surgeries, masks were worn by personnel as a visual placebo for patients and visitors who were fearful of germs in a sick environment.
While they were known to have little to no medical efficacy preventing most infections they gave many uninformed and frightened people psychological comfort to overcome their fear. They had a placebo effect. Hence the term.
In providing that placebo effect the wearer of the placebo mask was required to follow strict mask safety protocols. Because the risk of masking was known to be the wearer's. Charts were posted in employee areas showing proper donning and doffing techniques, only touching the straps, not touching faces to adjust, wearing for short durations, moist and discolored masks discarded properly, etc.
Medical personnel were even observed by safety officials to make sure proper mask safety protocols were being observed. Trained medical professionals had to be constantly reminded. And HCF's kept Infection Control Logs, frequently noting improper mask safety resulted in self-infection.
All one has to do is look at how the untrained general public masks to know that self-infection frequently occurs in the community. Most with strong enough immune systems to defeat serious infection. Until they finally get overwhelmed by constant exposure to the petri dish pathogens in front of their mouth and nose they inhale over and over.
Placebo masks. Falsely promoted as protective. And safe for the general public wearer without following protocols that trained professionals need reminding. Fake, phoney and false linguistic deception by omission.
And the reality of community masking outside a HCF actually serves the behavioral science NPI of fear amplification, masked faces in public trigger the amygdala fight, flight or freeze response, equivalent to seeing a snake - studies I've shared previously on Michelle's Substack.
The pandemic has been a pandemic of linguistic deceptions, all designed to amplify fear at the same time authorities shift blame for their failures onto the disobedient. History offers many lessons on what type of government does these things. Like the mass murderous ones of the 20th century. Sames. Evil needs lies and deception to prevail.
Thanks once again for taking the time to share this important information. It breaks my heart a bit each time I'm confronted by yet more fraud and disinformation. Will it ever stop? I wish, on this first day of the new year, that I had some concrete answers or words of wisdom to share. Unfortunately, the well is dry.
Shared previously - the science of masks for pandemic NPI. Behavioral science. Not medical science. Psychology. Fear amplification in community settings (as opposed to health facilities where people are understandably, but unscientifically, fearful of germs and infections) to keep people apart from one another, ostensibly to "slow the spread" of a virus - that is already widespread by the time it is detected in a community.
This study explains why masked faces evoke fear in people (pre-pandemic used by bank robbers and plane hijackers.) Banned for that reason. Pre-pandemic. Here's the scientific background on the importance of faces, visible expressions, for a healthy society and healthy social interactions. A healthy society requires faces be seen. Not just eyes. Full facial expressions are an essential form of human communication and stabilizes society. And perhaps most importantly, human aggression is moderated by full faces.
Of snakes and faces: An evolutionary perspective on the psychology of fear. (2009)
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00784.x
"In 1972, Ekman published cross-cultural data that shifted the at the time accepted view that facial expression, like other social gestures, reflected mere cultural convention, into the Darwinian (Darwin, 1872/1998) tenet that expressions of emotion in the human face represent biologically evolved adaptations. Anger, for example, is a threat signal potentially related to harmful intent, whereas a smile is the opposite, a reassuring signal of friendly affiliation. Against this background, Öhman and Dimberg (1978) invoked the preparedness theory to predict that an angry face should be more easily conditioned to an aversive US than should a happy face."
"The survival premium of astute detection of subtle cues given off by predators shaped a highly sensitive visual system that later proved useful in the social arena with the expanding social life of anthropoid primates. For example, the sensitivity for danger cues promoted vigilance for early detection of stimuli that announced potential aggressive encounters in social conflicts. It is a fascinating fact that the forebrain structures that have expanded most in size during primate evolution not only include – as we all know – the prefrontal cortex, but also the amygdala. Furthermore, it appears that the enlargement of these two structures was linked, both of them driven by group size (Barton & Aggleton, 2000). The prefrontal link is important because it allows inhibitory modulation of the amygdala, thus promoting strategic cognitive control of the expression of fear..."
"The prefrontal influence on facial as well as other channels of emotional expression helps to maintain conflicts at a symbolic level, where the relative strength of the combatants can be evaluated from more or less convincing displays of power and submissiveness, which prevents escalating the conflict into an actual fight that might result in injuries to the participants.
A substantial part of the signaling action in conflicts between individuals centers on the faces of the parties measuring their relative strength. As recognized by Darwin (1872/1998), the design of the face suggests that it has evolved as a means of communication. The facial muscles are unique in their function by primarily moving dermal tissue rather than body limbs, producing coordinated changes in the visual appearance of the face. The basic human facial displays are similar to those of other primates, but the human face has a more complex musculature than that of other primates, with a more versatile neural innervation, suggesting that the human ability to communicate by the face is better developed than that of our primate relatives..."
I believe fear porn played a significant role in getting the general public to comply. I believe it was deliberate. I look forward to those, who used these psychological principles to influence the behavior of the public., to be accountable for their actions.
I've spent a great deal of time researching and studying the ethics of coercive and manipulative behavioral science. The ethics of deception. There is such a thing, wouldn't you know. They were obliterated during the pandemic. The ethical guardrails of psychological manipulation were blown right through as though they didn't exist.
There are many principles in these ethics, not the least of which is the recognition of good news that allows authorities to relax and soften their methods of coercion and manipulation. In order to maintain the trust and good faith of the target population. As good information was presented, like the PCR test "cases" overstating actual infections by 90-95%. It wasn't accounted for, instead authorities double-downed and invested more of their authority into perpetuating that deception. Ethical failure, forfeiting future public trust for short-term agendas.
Do you know the only ethical restriction on authorities lying to, deceiving the public? If the lie and deception can be detected by an intelligent and educated person. That's it. That's the ethical test. As long as the lie, deception isn't imperceptible to an intelligent and educated person, as is the case with subliminal messaging, it is within the ethics of authorities lying to and deceiving the public. Which means that as we, the educated and intelligent people, detect the lies and deceptions and begin sharing them with one another the behavioral scientists pat themselves on their backs knowing that they stand within their ethics, our complaints are proof-positive. "Heads we win, Tails you lose." Nice set of ethics, huh?
When you go down the rabbit hole of the ethical deployment of behavioral science psychology-based campaigns made by authorities, even in public emergencies, there's a whole lot to discover. And realize that the very ethics that the field proclaims allow them to stand in their integrity were/are being obliterated under pretense of public health emergencies. The field has gone rogue. At the direction of power-hungry authoritarians. The ethical guardrails treated as mere suggestions, sped over like small speed bumps on the expressway to a permanent totalitarian global government. By the arrogant and cruel who believe the ends of their pursuits justify the means of achieving them.
The more things change, the more they stay the same...breaking eggs, making omelets...as authoritarians see it, anyways.
https://www.nytco.com/company/prizes-awards/new-york-times-statement-about-1932-pulitzer-prize-awarded-to-walter-duranty/
"Taking Soviet propaganda at face value this way was completely misleading, as talking with ordinary Russians might have revealed even at the time. Duranty’s prize-winning articles quoted not a single one – only Stalin, who forced farmers all over the Soviet Union into collective farms and sent those who resisted to concentration camps. Collectivization was the main cause of a famine that killed millions of people in Ukraine, the Soviet breadbasket, in 1932 and 1933 – two years after Duranty won his prize.
Even then, Duranty dismissed more diligent writers’ reports that people were starving. “Conditions are bad, but there is no famine,” he wrote in a dispatch from Moscow in March of 1933 describing the “mess” of collectivization. “But – to put it brutally – you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.”"