lots

corona/Profit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+# Profit
+
+## Question
+*Does it all just come down to profit?*
+
+Obviously, none of these undertakings are even viable if they cannot yield a profit, or the productive capacity wouldn't exist. These types of mechanisms are all set up as part of emergency preparedness planning, which is achieved through intergovernmental agencies at the global scale. That these agreements constitute a form o evidence supporting profit motive is akin to calling it a conspiracy. These are all things that can be organized in plain sight, therfore there are plenty of commonly understood explanations for every implementation detail.
+
+We have already heard key politicians declare that covid is a unique opportunity to initiative and advance operations otherwise unfeasible and unviable - We should stop our habit of failing to criticize demands and proposals under general fear of being labeled conspiracy theory, because we can see that there needn't be a conspiracy when those who stand to benefit garnish their bias with hubris as they gloat in open sight without the most minimal semblance of self awareness (that which would be necessary to acknowledge risks associated with gamefying situational response (disaster relief, even sustainable development)).
+
+So this brings us to the next question: why are we so uncritical? Well who are we talking about, in considerating being uncritical of the response?
+1. Those who support it, or don't support it
+2. Those who experience a consequence of their public visibility on the matter
+- supporter visibility: congruence with the overwhelming and prevailing narrative - one which makes them salient in political discourse, media discourse, medical discourse, compatible with many popular messages that had been ramping throughout (or at least, for the first )
+- non-supporter visibility:

corona/ade_concerns.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+# ADE Concerns
+One of the issues with the ADE is that it's not so clear and cut that we're able to detect it. There are always going to be a massive number of confounding variables, so detecting whether or not someone's susceptibility to a disease has been altered by an intervention is always going to be tricky. Unless the pathology is so incredibly enhanced that a harmless disease becomes a deadly one in a majority of persons, it's quite possible that a moderate to significant change of pathology could be induced without anyone realizing the change.
+
+Immunopathology
+- There is no clear control group. We're essentially going on diagnoses, observations and subsequent analyses performed for on in-patients, with a possible autopsy being performed on some. If the majority of persons have received the vaccine, however, then the comparative severity is going to become even more difficult to compare.
+
+Adaptation to virus
+- The virus has been part of the environment for some time now
+- Mutation of virus is expected to reduce virulence while increasing transmissibility
+
+Observability
+- There's no reliable way of differentiating between antibodies which contribute to ADE vs ones which effectively neutralize a pathogen
+- There's 

corona/against_racism.md

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+"Aren't you against racism?" "Don't you know that racism exists?"
+
+Of course I know that racism exists. What do you think happens when you're the only Indian kid in an 80s or 90s classroom? How about one who fights the bully to have him be recognized veritably as an East Indian rather than the Indigenous Indian they first assumed him to be. For family honour. For love of father and respect for justice.
+ 
+Or how about having a wife from another continent, learning English as a second language, and accompaniying her through middle class North American atmospheres where all the local-born women try to treat her as mentally deficient and naive. Rolling their eyes at her accent, dropping obscure and menacing expressions, and chuckling disparagingly at her awkward choice of directly translated terms? (f those b)
+
+You know who those people are.
+
+They're the first ones to jump on the woke bandwagon and implement its most easily grasped concepts to their sociocultural advantage. This is what they've been doing their entire lives - but now you wave a flashy wand in front of them and inform them: If you wield this and manipulate others, you'll be heralded as a saviour of the unfortunate and a champion of rectitude.
+
+I will not participate in your vacuous, self congratulatory glorification of victimhood. The battles we're fighting don't need us to be weak - quite the contrary.

corona/classical_u_o.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+Response:
+
+I think what didn't jive with me for public school was seeing how kids could be rewarded by technically following rules, while also doing things which seemed morally repugnant. I was bullied a lot, and I found that sometimes the same kids who would bully me were the ones who would get in the teachers' good graces.  The fact that you could do really well by gaming the system, instead of promoting fairness and honesty, left me with some strange suspicion.
+
+The next point would probably be that I had a lot of initiative and enthusiasm for learning and exploring, but that it would often get me into trouble, such as being singled out as a troublemaker, and ending up with my desk facing the wall, for example. I didn't understand if it was because I was misbehaving, or just inferior such that my ideas weren't good enough. I likely didn't have the patience to sit through classes, and didn't have the disposition to try to do something that wasn't different, even though I was somewhat obsessed with wanting to be "average" so that I could eventually find love / acceptance or what have you.
+
+It was especially clear after having fallen into the role of mentor countless times (often with people who had been perfectly molded to participate with normalcy, every step of their lives, and then later as a guitar/music teacher and a personal trainer) that the people's unrelenting compulsion to worry as to whether or not their actions are compliant with "normalcy" was, in a sense, a mental illness which prevented them from achieving higher levels of performance, or even simply identifying what in the world their thoughts, interests and values are. 
+
+The class model seems to fall short (though it has its uses, particularly for performance, group activities, and playing enough games to see the meta game) when it comes to overall development. I think that we're at the point where technology allows us to be resourceful and give people the individual attention they really need, in the amounts they require, and no more, and that this alone could lead to such a massive improvement in society and culture. This is a criticism of both private and public education.
+
+You're very kind.. my writing style is a product of my parents and the fact that I spent too many hours on the internet chatting with women who were twice my age (when I was a teenager - this was my socialization). I did really well in elementary school, not as well in middle school, and awful in high school (I managed to pass, but mostly because I was known for being really sick - I missed 110 full days of school in my senior year).
+
+Do you mean to say you didn't graduate from school? I'm curious about what your experiences were.
+
+I wonder about Florida too. If it's just a perfectly crafted piece for the puzzle, then I still prefer it to where I am, if only because the spirit of freedom burns a bit brighter there (even just as opinion among Floridians). I'd have to assume that things are expertly organized, but I've also worked both in public sector in administration/policy, and privately in things creative (music) and technical (engineering). There is a massive hole in the perspectives of policy planners. They aren't able to grok what it takes for things to work, the distance between a precise system and a deployed system (the former doesn't seem to exist, but the planners easily conflate the two, whereas the engineers obsess over the error margins that are otherwise ignored). I think that, for that reason, nothing will ever work as well as they hope it does, and that creates critical movement to occur.
+
+Now, all that said, it's likely that the march towards absolute domination is done iteratively, and that this whole covid fiasco isn't meant to result in that final state of explicit totalitarianism. It may have been the most perfect adjustment of the bar.
+
+Canadian doctor - I believe his name is Charles Hoffe. Interesting that the victims had a high representation of Indigenous people. They often have poor health these days. So many are on the street here - I used to know many of them, and would hang out with them in the downtown market, smoke weed with them, play guitar, etc... I grew up going to a church, and there was a very liberal, upper middle class couple who adopted an Inuit boy. They provided things to him which most of the Inuit community would never be able to, but nevertheless - within time, he was on the streets in those that downtown market as well. Spending nights in the homeless shelter, and scavenging for crack and alcohol during the day. Their culture has been raped, and the whole set of Indigenous/Inuit government initiatives are so wasteful and patronizing that I feel it does little except reward them with tokens of frivolty for claiming a victim status.
+
+I always think back to this time I was hired to play classical guitar for some University of Ottawa professors who were hosting their daughter's wedding. Their daughter was also an assistant professor (mostly climate change related), and they were staunch atheists. Except, they also deal with the indigenous community, because they drag them around everywhere for climate change committees, because it somehow replaces science if you parade around with noble savages. Anyway, I found it so fitting that these atheists would bring an Indigenous elder to their wedding, so they could have them perform a land acknowledgment and then bless their event with mysticism. These types of atheists slurp up every drop of metaphysical koolaid, so long as it's politically en vogue. They probably even believe in it, at that moment, since they're permitted.
+
+Not to go off on a tangent, but that's I think that just paints a picture of why I think these central planners, in spite of their carefully formulated plans, and well mapped out alliances, are still always prone to critical blindspots. They don't know how to test if their things actually work, they just need to be patted on the back enough times to keep up the fascade.
+
+In spite of that, you bring up the problem of this being a "long game". They are most certainly playing that long game. I don't know if Reiner is correct in assuming they've jumped the gun and acted sooner than anticipated (one wonders if the virus was well planned, or if they'd just been waiting for the right event to be instantiated).
+
+I'm worried about quarantine camps and prisons, too. Especially with Bill C-36 being proposed, here, which turns us all into criminals (well, offenders of a Human Rights Commission's code, but it sets up the right path). I just don't know if they have particular use for the calories, this time around. If the same degree of infringement were to be imposed, I'm not sure what it would look like. What utility would they be able to extract?
+
+
+MORE:
+
+The feminist desire to identify victims

corona/dearleader.md

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+They go on about their days as though there's no material difference to what they've done - and what could be more apt? As surely, none of them will be able to know just what a difference it made for themselves. It could have been a placebo, for all they are concerned, and they would have still participated. They spent as little time as they needed to, and made their decision. The whole world supported them, and they couldn't be happier than they are to believe that their world is being delivered back to them, with no strings attached, except for those who are 

corona/dearleader.mdd

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+The case of Dear Leader in Canada is a curious one. Our leader embodies the stereotypes which is most ardent supporters claim to despise in others, yet they afford such a person the most 

corona/differentiating_wokeism.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+In some respects, it seems rather redundant to differentiate today's covidians from neo-racist wokes, technocratic authoritarians, or even just nihilists from any group possessing intolerant puritan-like manners of thought, throughout history. Some might even call them apaths.
+
+In all likelihood, this is an eternal problem, an archetypal problem, a bimodally dependent path of rationalization for which a consciousness believing itself to be biologically dependent must continuously make a choice. 
+
+Though this may be an eternal problem, it still needs an interface through which to be dealt with, and context to be understood as a structure developed with its own characteristic progression.
+
+Just as the core components of an operating system are that which deal with primary CPU registers that hold what we might believe to hold a value, one could, without context, believe that the value is nothing but a mess of information, lacking temporal/functional chronology and hierarchical placement. Without such context, the same value is itself burdensome and blinding, rather than helpful and insightful. It could even be compared to a particular toanl structure resonating in timespace, and its requiring harmonic context, or even surrounding material context, to give it remarkable meaning and purpose in place of that which might otherwise be perceived as resonating in a static form - a resonance which, on its own, vibrates as an unnerving and menacing cacophony wreaking havoc on the senses.

corona/participating_in_what.md

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+
+What we have here is some effort to coordinate the entire population into being committed to participating in a process which maximizes the rate at which we produce solutions for all enumerable diseases.
+
+The size of the voices of the proponents in the dialogue, or I would even just call it a narrative, which decribes the problem being solved and the solution which best befits - and this is especially because of the war on words which attempts to control the most universally accepted expressions and make them more malleable - enjoy an enormous advantage in terms of the platform being afforded them, and the preferential treatment they are given by states and investors. It's the same old story which purports through naming the vastest array of human interests and replaces the process of refining the dialogue. This is because, when you serve Theory, you serve something which can be taken prematurely, through the frantic panic of the populace, and made into laws that dare not be challenged, it sells humanity short. Perhaps some would say that it's better to have some action than no action at all, but that's obviously false, for we all know of malicious actions. If we need for `children` to lay out battle of semantics in order to inform a decision that must be made - an action which must be performed - then all efforts to limit the process, for though it may contend that it is limiting processes that are negating other forms of human perception - its limitation is inherently one which limits human perception. The dialogue which evaluates the legitimacy of the claim that those processes that are suppressed were indeed suppressive, is one which is itself suppressive, and which achieves its aims through censorship.

corona/studies.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32537156/
+
+https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7268563/
+
+https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3976/rr-13
+

new/DistrustForVaxStats.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+# Distrust of Public Health Statistics
+
+There have been continuous reports coming from various public health organizations which summarize their analysis of the state of medical facilities with respect to COVID-19. For the most part, they've been predictable in the sense that they, at a high level, report a higher proportion of hospitalizations and deaths for those that have not been vaccinated. Many celebrate this as a sign that the vaccines are a success and or use this as evidence that whoever is still not vaccinated should be condemned, shamed and, if necessary, ostracized and expelled from society. The problem is that there is disagreement about how these statistics are computed and what they mean. Rather than engage in discourse to clarify any potential for misunderstanding and pursue the means of improving analysis and reporting, there has been an incessant predisposition by public health officials, politicians and big tech platforms to censor those who question the reports and maintain the status of these publications as iron-clad proof that we can base our conclusions upon.
+
+Is it really fair to discourage discourse and criticism of these reports? On the one hand we might say that it's better to avoid discouraging persons from vaccination, and to avoid complicating matters which might lead to confusion, as it's very easy for any individual to be caught on any segment in the semantic process of formulating, computing, reporting and critiquing the reports that are being published. This makes some sense, as it could be said that, regardless of whether or not the vaccines as effective as the ideal preventative treatment, they're what we have at the moment, they've been proven more effective than not, and they are the means by which we can mitigate the remaining threat of this "pandemic". Furthermore, for whatever efficacy they yield, they reduce the risk of future outbreaks of variants.
+
+On the other hand, it might be inaccurate to come to these conclusions, as they all require deducible predicates which themselves might not be qualify as easily as is being assumed. Here is a quick an introductory breakdown before we go into deeper anaysis:
+
+## Rationales and their predicates
+1. These are the vaccines we have
+- Assumes that they are more efficacious than not.
+- Assumes that the most important threat affected by these vaccines is the SARS-CoV2 virus
+- Assumes that they provide a net benefit
+2. They are proven
+- Assumes that the data which has been aggregated thus far leans in one direction
+- Assumes that the means by which we evaluate the data is rigorous and helpful
+- Assumes that they are proven on the basis of any degree of efficacy
+3. They can mitigate the remaining threat
+- Assumes they we have agreed upon targets which, if met, signal the end of the threat
+- Assumes that in cases where the targets are being met, the threat has been mitigated and policy is changed as expected
+- Assumes that in places where the vaccines have been used to the degree that was initially proposed, the threat is lower than in places where the vaccines have not been used to the same degree.
+4. They rediec the risk of future outbreaks of variants
+- Assumes that the rate and type of mutations that have been incurred thus far are worrisome
+- Assumes that the likelihood of producing a dangerous variant increased on the basis of there being a lower level of vaccination.
+
+## Analysis
+
+### These are the vaccines we have
+
+#### More efficacious than not
+Are they more efficacious than not? What sort of measurement would lead to such a conclusion? Are we performing that measurement? If so, what conclusion are we arriving at? Are these conclusions localized or universal? What can be done to improve the measurement process?
+
+##### Efficacy
+When the public is told that a treatment is efficacious, what they take in is essentially the following:
+1. The theat you should be most concerned about is that of COVID-19
+2. This treatment will stop you from getting COVID-19
+3. This treatment will stop you from transmitting COVID-19.
+4. This treatment is efficacious in mitigating the threat of disease,
+
+##### The threat you should be most concerned about is that of COVID-19
+One needn't look too hard to see that there are exist other mortal threats which cause greater damage both in intensity and in numbers of persons affected. The argument against these concerns is to say that the damage brought about by COVID-19 is less understood, causes long term damage that we aren't yet able to observe, leads to future pandemics that are much worse, and leads to greater socioeconomic distress than other threats.
+
+I'm not sure any of those statements can be qualified, but they are the arguments that are used against bringing up other threats, in spite of the fact that not only are the other threats more serious by the immediate numbers, immediate numbers that have been enhanced due to our states' and world's influential elite focusing all resources towards mitigation of the COVID threat, but that are being potentiated across unknown time scales that cannot be predicted except insofar that we should reasonably expect the causative effect to be an increase.
+
+##### This treatment will stop you from getting COVID-19
+It has been declared many times by public health officials, politicians, the media, and other private professionals of all stripes, that taking the vaccine will stop you from getting infected with COVID-19 and stop you from being hospitalized and dying.
+
+This has not been proven. In fact, it has been shown over and over again to be false, and declared as such even by the very same public health organizations that previously assured us this would not be the case.
+
+In spite of these realizations, many professionals, and most politicians, have continued to make the case that the vaccines will stop you from getting COVID-19
+
+##### This treatment will stop you from transmitting COVID-19
+This was the big one. The crux of the argument for mandating vaccines, coercing people to take vaccines, and for even allowing for persons to be taking vaccines whose key clinical trials are still ongoing, was on the basis of stating that herd immunity could be achieved through their use.
+
+Nothing could be further from the truth, however, as it is well known that these vaccines do not:
+a) provide protection in the upper respiratory tract
+b) stop you from being infected with SARS-CoV2
+c) stop you from transmitting SARS-CoV2 to others
+
+##### This treatment is efficacious in mitigating the threat of disease

new/Fascism.md

@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+# Fascism
+
+## Intro
+It is becoming fascism, a state of it, an attitude of it.
+
+It seems that many might even just demand it, having allowed themselves to believe that they are within a fortnight of losing their lives if just the wrong person exhales in the wrong place.
+
+But do they really believe that? Who are those who are most vocal about that sort of thing?
+
+## Who
+Are they the most at-risk? Doubtful -> it is likely easier to predict the degree to which one is aggressively intolerant of unvaxxed purely from:
+- Media consumption (quantity, nature of programming)
+- Partisan affiliation
+- Workplace environment
+- Friends and family
+
+So, then it comes down to wondering which of the following best applies to them:
+1. They are concerned for their loved ones
+2. They feel a strong sense of community
+3. They are egotistical and manipulative
+4. They are predisposed to authoritarianism
+5. They are predisposed to disgust sensitivity, hypochondria, anxiety
+6. They are concerned that they will be rejected from the community if they don't appear to be respecting the community's requirements
+
+## It's Not Fascism
+### It's Not Far-Right
+The most simplistic breakdown of politics is the left-right paradigm. The problem with this means of formulating the political characistics is that the ideas do, indeed, seem to span off in opposing directions.
+But though the concepts might seem to be disparate at the surface, the systems they produce don't themselves offer any drastic differences either economically or socially, with both leaning towards an authoritarian system where asymmetric influence is enjoyed by corporations and the political families who facilitate influence by the corporate stakeholders. This lends itself to an oligarchical pattern which never fulfills the collectivist promises it alludes to, while also eroding the fundamental human rights which would otherwise act as a fail-safe against the tendency of systems to become tyrannical.
+
+### Suppression of Opposition
+- Consolidated views between existing parties prevent opposition/dissenting views from proliferating in the political landscape
+- Corporate influence of all leading parties
+- Media corporations that have grown weaker and less influential are kept afloat through government initiatives. This has the consequence of biasing the media to present the incumbent party in an uncritical light.
+
+### Regimentation of Society
+- The state enumerates and defines all aspects of society in a formalized manner which best befits the goals and ideology of the incumbent party. This is done to such an advanced degree that it supplants the independent values of the society's citizenry, presupposing that the value of their contributions can only be measured in accordance with the formal definitions laid out by the state.
+
+### Nationalism
+- The state has, for many years now, been complicit in producing copious cognitive dissonance by both promoting ideologies which undermine nationalism, while also replacing definitions for universal values with ones which constrain formulation and participation in promoting these values through means which benefit the state and villify non-participation.
+
+### Fascistic Leaders
+The bitter irony is ever so clear, as our leaders demand freedom for those subjected to tyranny outside of our local sphere of influence. Within our own homes, however, absolute obedience is demanded and any inclination to question or doubt is evidence to be used for your own subjugation.
+
+There is no respect for human reason, just a callous drive to assign you to a lower caste where your capacity to evoke change in the world is replaced with nothing more than a confined potential to serve them.
+
+Indeed, work will make you free, but only if you are so fortunate so as to be gifted the option to.
+
+HEADER: Fanatics are oppressing women and children in far away lands!
+
+HASHTAGS: covidism
+tyranny
+globalHegemony
+doubleStandards
+afghanistan
+taliban
+branchCovidians
+politicalIncumbency
+maskingChildren
+vaccinePassports
+
+PROMOTE: Does silence preserve you?

new/Internal_consistency.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+# Internal Consistency: Introduction
+Why this absence of a need to maintain internal consistency?
+Can we explore that phenomenon? How does the human mind come to be in such a state that it recognizes a challenge to the IC? Surely the event does not include a significant consequence for this modality - not at the moment of realization. But there must be that moment of realization, or at least suspicion, where one sees a potential for the issue to be examined and resolved.
+
+1. Perception and beliefs are established
+2. Challenges to the understanding present themselves
+
+Q. What does the mind do? How does one proceed
+
+## Options
+1. Ignore
+2. Adopt position which acknowledges a lack of consistency
+3. Seek resolution/rectification/consolidation
+
+### 1. Ignore
+- realization occurs, but the mind sets focus elsewhere
+- immediate needs do not include, or do not incur first-order effects by the information observed to challenge understanding
+- more grave if occurs subsequently
+
+### 2. Acknowledge lack of consistency
+- Mode of being perceived to be intrinsically bound to this limitation.
+- No trust in fellow humans
+- Bias towards lack of faith in human capacity for reason
+- Expectation that there is no truth among humans, just power
+
+### 3. Seek resolution
+- Identify information which disproves issue
+- Identify information which allows one to believe that understanding cannot be or should not be sought
+- Resolve
+
+# Ignoring Breach of Internal Consistency
+
+That isn't to say that some might do this while others do not, on the contrary, this is going to happen just simply by virtue of having a limited capacity to observe and analyze the necessary information. Our cognitive biases imply add icing to that cake, or turn it to a diabeetus in every bite.
+
+We have too much complexity to deal with, thus we limit the set of work and scope of interest to ensure prioritized work can be performed. For some matters, though, we find ourselves heavily vested, to the point where a lack of critical insight could lead to tragic and catastrophic consequences. So how do we manage to choose an unclean/unreasoned path?
+- Conflicting information presents itself and;
+- Able to conclude the source is not to be trusted, even superficially
+- Rationalize that there is something more pressing
+- Tell oneself that there will be a followup
+
+So how to consolidate the threat of unknown error? Think as a child:
+- Feign ignorance, even to yourself
+- Reality is not fully formed (or approved)
+- Reality is only ever real when we are verifying our observations
+- being together

new/June_2021.md

@@ -80,12 +80,6 @@ Either one is fear mongering children into believing they are in grave danger wh
 
 There is no way out of it, we either have a message of the young sacrificing themselves for the old, or we have a message to fear that which should be less fearful, which may very well oversensitize their fear in perpetuity. To be break one down into fearing the lowest possible risk might irreperably fracture the mind. It's comforting to some, however, that some may never complain about it (I believe this is because they're resilient).
 
-
-
-
-
-
-
 What are the tradeoffs that no one is really considering, when celebrating the "observed efficacy" of a treatment. Does it mean that we're not being critical of the data? Should the benefit of having a celebration ellide the need to be critical of the data?
 
 For those who already do criticize that data, the fact of there being a new announcement isn't really so groundbreaking. What's most groundbreaking about it, in fact, are the questions which come adjoined in declaring the findings.

new/Mask_risk_benefit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# Masks Are Benevolent
+
+- Minor inconvenience which might save lives
+
+# Certainty
+Requires certainty about the following:
+- it is appropriate / well-required
+- it offers no impediment to me
+- it offers no impediment to others
+- it offers no impediment for society
+
+# Difficulty
+- Do as I'm told
+- Already expectation of impediment/harm from doing so
+-

new/My_Most_Marvelous_Companion.md

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+The most marvelous companion, an ingenuitive creature who could never be imagined, and who embodies life's essence of discovery, my masterful matriarch grows ever-more enchanting as each day goes by. Ready to challenge your ideas and ideals, she raises you higher than your eyes ever reached before. She affords you the knowledge of your weaknesses, rather than the deceiving comfort of your strengths, but she will still invoke flattery with surgical precision at the moment it matters most.
+
+Such a wonderous creation could never be planned, iterated or improved upon. It is the most magnificent combination of wisdom and spontaneity, which is never captured, but always realized.
+
+I love you

new/Religious_fanatics.md

@@ -1,21 +1,21 @@
-# Religious Fanaticism
-1. All must subscribe and pray, or they are unholy and inviting evil into our shared environment
-2. All are cursed and contaminated by the devil and must denounce him.
-3. They want you to use their words - to at least use Holy Language, but also to make declarative statements: blessing/empowering their symbols.
+Religious Fanatics R
+Woke W
+Covidists C
 
-## Wokes
-1. All must join in our anti-racist plight, or they are contributing to racism
-2. All are infected with racism and must denounce their racism as a step towards becoming less racist
-3. Many blasphemies - must use our language to describe your world - many things you could never talk about
+R1. All must subscribe and pray, or they are unholy and inviting evil into our shared environment
+W1. All must join in our anti-racist plight, or they are contributing to racism
+C1. All must participate in our proactive efforts to stop the spread of COVID, or they are actively potentiating and even directly involved in its propagating its transmission.
 
+R2. All are cursed and contaminated by the devil and must denounce him.
+W2. All are infected with racism and must denounce their racism as a step towards becoming less racist
+C2. All are vectors for viral load and must take the vaccine to reduce the amount of virus they spread. Even the vaccinated are spreaders of the virus. All are to be regarded as contaminated with coronavirus and must take the first step towards reducing their viral load by taking the injection.
 
-## Covidists
-1. All must participate in our proactive efforts to stop the spread of COVID, or they are actively potentiating and even directly involved in its propagating its transmission.
-2. All are vectors for viral load and must take the vaccine to reduce the amount of virus they spread. Even the vaccinated are spreaders of the virus. All are to be regarded as contaminated with coronavirus and must take the first step towards reducing their viral load by taking the injection.
-3. Language must not give rise to vaccine hesitancy, must not vilify those who promote vaccination.
+R3. All must use the Holy Language, but make its associated declarations, lest they glorify devilry.
+W3. Don't microaggress, bigot.
+C3. Language must not give rise to vaccine hesitancy, must not vilify those who promote vaccination.
 
-```
-of course, if you really want the most robust protection against racism, you need to have persons who freely use their minds to understand the futility of racism and to promote universal truths which benefit everyone
+of course, if you realy want to mitigate the tendency of religious fanaticism to become murderous and intolerant, you need open dialogue between persons of different belief systems who cooperate in a society for the greater good of all
 
-of course, if you want the most robust protection against pathogens, you need to have persons who can freely develop the most comprehensive immunological protection, which can only occur from real-life exposure to the pathogen
-```
+of course, if you really want the most robust protection against racism, you need to have persons who freely use their minds to understand the futility of racism and promote universal truths which benefit everyone
+
+of course, if you want the most robust protection against pathogens, you need a population with comprehensive physiological expression, physiological overhead and comprehensively adapted immune systems

new/Resilient_children.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+# Resilient, You Say
+
+They can tolerate increases above normal values.
+
+Values of what? Difficulty, stress, need for patience, absence of social contact, expectation that their dreams can be placed on hold. That the pace of progress in their lives can be slowed for now and hopefully be brought back closer to their potential rate at a later time -> all of us, in fact, but we don't use people's lives to compel a pause for dialogue, anymore -> Just the children, who are posed and postured for opportunists to manipulate the masses, and silence many critics.
+
+But whose rate is declining?
+
+If you are a politician extraordinaire, and your brand of politics swas in the direction of redistributing, and needing ever more agreement to increase public support of ever-more porlific and forward-reaching projects, then corona is the birthplace of your new career. Regardless of your real and visible public support, you have been busy making deals, connections, and laying the groundwork for new, lengthy projects which, in theory, can go on for, in some cases, longer than your remaining life.
+
+Even if you don't believe in political opportunism, you can't survive in this political climate unless you are, at the very least, speaking the current language. And the new weight of your enquiry and command is something that one can grow accustomed to. So there is no doubt that they are operating with dramatic potential to be influencd by the need to remain politically viable, congruent to the political vehicles of the day, and by the utility they derive from operating within this new framework. That the fraemwork yields utility apart from its capacity to fulfill its intended purpose necessarily causes an outcome whereby those who stand to benefit from it are liable to confuse its utility to them as the efficacy it yields towards its purpose.
+
+In much the same way, the resilience of a child is so great as their ability to withstand pain, disappointment and a deprioritization in society. Failure to indicate greater concern, while also using the circumstance for one's professional development, is another

new/SafetyRights.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+# The right to Safety
+
+Many have looked at the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and concluded that the state guarantees them the legal right to safety. There are obviously some questions with arise from this, and we need to investigate them further, but first we should ask if anyone who interprets the Charter, or similar declarations, in this manner has ever asked the question:
+
+What is safety? How can it be guaranteed? Can actions which are performed to improve safety for one individual liable to reduce safety for another?
+Is it morally justified to improve safety for some, if it reduces safety for others?
+
+## 1. What is Safety?
+Safety would be the state of being free from harm. From the standpoint of a human being, harm could be any of the following:
+- death
+- injury
+- stress
+  - reduction of metabolic capacity
+  - reduction of structural capacity
+  - reduction of immune capacity
+  - reduction of cognitive capacity
+
+The last one has become particularly pronounced in recent years, as there have been neverending political movements which insist that what we previously considered as being "harm" no longer sufficiently encompasses the range of possible harms which humans endure, and that this failure to identify all the forms of harm is itself a form of violence.
+
+I bring this up particularly because, though we might all begin with an implied definition appropriate to recent declarations of public safety, we must be cognizant that the range of definitions is quite varied, and that the ability to consolidate such a range is virtually impossible - at least, insofar that it can be done to a degree which satisfies everyone's particular concerns and needs.
+
+If we proceed with a strategy which increasingly permits various forms of harm as being sufficiently harmful to be enumerated, then it stands to reason that existence is itself a form of harm, as we cannot proceed temporally through our mutually understood operating environment (field theory). We cannot have it both ways - either harm is something so substantial that we choose terms which no cognitively capable human would deny, or we choose to accept that the concept of harm is something so wide and vast that it cannot be utilized in any sort of political sense, without committing ourselves to unreasonable expectations which are doomed to create an unforeseen set of problems.
+
+Nevertheless, let's look at these and aim to understand whether or not they can be addressed.
+
+### Death
+If the guarantee of safety is to afford us the means by which to evade death, then it's no guarantee at all, unless we are to venture off into the theoretical.
+
+Death is expected by all, and though we could make the argument that certain measures can be utilized in order to potentiate a reduction of death, such measures would necessarily need to identify a specific cause of death and champion its reduction over all other causes. It should be implicitly understood that in doing so, we are also potentiating deaths from other causes. This occurs regardless of strategy, simply by means of focusing resources on one cause of death. One cannot, as a first order operation, focus attention on one point of concern without simultaneously and obligatorily remove attention from another point of concern. Though there can be second order effects which may contribute a reduction of risk with respect to another concern, it is not by virtue of a first order focus on that other concern. Given that there are potentially an infinite set of concerns, it is logical to assume that focusing on one concern will necessitate an increase of risk for some unknown quantity of concerns. It should also be expected that the unknown quantity of concerns are themselves liable to modification of valence whose changes are not being focused upon, at least not to the degree of focus which is being applied to the explicit concern to which focus is being applied.
+
+So, regardless of what strategy is going to be applied, the only way it can be veritably be sought, with transparency, and in a manner which promotes trust, is to be forthcoming about the fact that the decision to prioritize the reduction of death by one specific cause will necessarily bring about an increase of death by other causes. It can be argued, quite effectively, that the increase of death by other causes will be less significant, and that we will enjoy a net reduction of death as a result, but to make this argument properly requires that we are open about the different temporal effects of these concerns. That is to say, that if we are choosing to prioritize the reduction of one cause of death, it's prioritization is being performed with respect to a temporal scale, and that we are specifically looking towards a net reduction of death for a given temporal period. If this is not clearly declared, then it is an erroneous declaration, as the scales and periods to which it can be compared against are infinite, thus making the comparison unfeasible.
+
+## Injury
+This one is even more difficult to observe and quantify, as the possible forms of injury which can occur are more numerous, more detailed in their structure/permutations and more liable to fail to be observed.
+
+Certainly it can be said that some measures could be introduced to ensure that one avoid injury. For example, having guard rails for a building's steps, or having a seatbelt policy, though I would wouldn't be surprised if these things turned out to be still more nuanced than we give credit to. Nevertheless, there can certainly exist reasonable measures, policies, recommendations, and similar which can be implemented to avoid or reduce the potential for injuries to be incurred by a society's citizenry.
+
+What becomes impossibly complex to evaluate, at least on the specific dimension of providing a rationalized recommendation or request to avoid injury, is comparing a forced modification of one's body to a theoretical circumstance which itself has not occurred.
+
+It must be said that whomsoever wishes to enforce or promote the enforcement of modifying people's bodies as part of a process which they themselves believe reduces their own chance of incurring death or injury, must also declare an understanding of the other risks of death or injury, their belief about our ability to observe and predict such risks, and their willingness to engage in dialogue about this complex subject. Failure to do this can be indicative that they are treating other people's lives and health as a personal commodity that can be used to protect or enhance their own circumstances.
+
+With that out of the way, let's assume that everyone participating in this society is orienting themselves towards truth, wants the best outcome the community, and understands that the community is made up of individuals whose individual state and function of health are what, in aggregate, contribute to the health of the community.
+
+If we are asking them to perform an action which effectively modifies their physiology, it's not simply a matter of ascertaining whether or not there is an immediate and acute response to the action which demonstrates an injury.
+
+It's also not a question of whether the most commonly observed effect of performing the action/modification is to be compared against the worst outcome of the concern which this action/modification is intended to mitigate.
+
+It's also not simply a question of whether or not this action/modification is efficacious in mitigating the concern in question.
+
+It is, in fact, a much more detailed and elaborate comparison and it requires many areas of investigation. In the interim, however, here is a rough breakdown:
+1. Research. Is this something which is well understood and has stood the test of time? Is this something for which a significant amount of unknowns still exist? Are there operations currently being performed to understand some of these things?
+2. Bias
+3. System of observation
+4. Declaring what cannot be known
+
+### Research
+Temporal scales matter. The amount of time we've been performing research indicates what things can be known and what things cannot be known.
+Ongoing research for blind spots of understanding is significant and indicates that we cannot understand the true nature of the risks for the treatment.
+Ongoing research necessary for the approval of a treatment is itself a massive red flag in the sense that its disregard is a code smell which suggests that the approval process is superfluous, as it's not demonstrated to be a necessary component to determining safety and use of the product. It begs the question of why there even needs to be an approval process, at all, or - at the very least, the approval process being sought for this particular therapy is likely to be erroneous and redundant.

new/TakeResponsibilityForHealth.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+To abscond from taking responsibility for one's health might seem like a path which is less than optimal for the perpetually anxious, because it means that they are allowing a beast to grow even larger and more powerful, but that is not necessarily leading them through a path of increased anxiety. It might simply mean that they have deferred the anxiety, simplifying the immediate so that they can be alleviated of the only real aspect of it, which is yet an apparent burden.
+
+There is nothing more powerful than alleviating the immediate complexity which constrains the option of acting, even if there will not be a particularly coherent action that will be chosen.
+
+The sensation of suffocation is something which begins as an idea and expands to be a visual representation or a spatial representation.
+
+Suffocation for this reason takes on many forms, and is inspired by a range of phenomena

new/Victim_wants_producer_to_change.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+The victim knows the path to enlightenment, but needs for you to be the one to hold up the lantern and bear witness to their ascension.
+
+If only you had held it up sooner. Then I wouldn't be suffering. Now it needs to be equity, because I am already operating at the normal level, the resting point of equitable calibration. In fact, I would make a great example of exactly where things should be, if not for the fact that I am actually enjoying a little less than what is fair. That this has not yet been rectified is a form of violence, and I have every right to be hostile and belligerent. If you don't understand, it's because you enjoy too much from the current, problematic circumstance - it's time for you to stop being so greedy.
+
+You have too much, but you are so unwise that your decisions (which are out of your control) doom you to squandering the value of your own resources in a destructive way which, tragically, causes harm to the innocent. Now that you know, however, any continuation can only be explained by evil.
+
+The lever of manipulation always lingers with every move, revealing constant opportunities to repent and ask for forgiveness, and always an ascription which uobts your faculties and intent.
+
+So the victim goes on to enjoy the ways in which those who embody all that they hate, have erected themselves using the ideals that the victim has chosen to identify themselves by, thereby obfuscating all of the aspects of themselves that are otherwise worthy of the types of criticism that the victim should be most fluent in disseminating. Why?
+
+Is it a form of projection? Does the victim believe that all of their criticisms of the world are true because they can imagine themselves harbouring the positions adn sentiments that they describe of their hated foe? If the foe can master the values upon which these criticisms are made, thent hey can embody the right values using the right types of demonstrated procedures.
+
+

new/WhiteWoman.md

@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+# White Woman Privilege
+There is no modern human existence more privileged than that of the white female, but even she is most predisposed to demanding that everyone else participate in acting out her racist delusions, just so she might not cause herself more anxiety.

new/WhitneyWebb_testimony_corona.md

@@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
+I would first of all point to youtube's parent company, Google, which among other things has invested heavily directly in the AStraZeneca vaccine through vaccitech. And broadly thispush by silicon valley to basically remake the health care system entirely, and a lot of this about moving to telemedicine and basically changing the normal paradigm of medical care nad they are invested in this specifically because they along with microsoft and other companies want to replace doctors with AI apps. there's efforst in the UK to replace the NHS with something called MHSX which is an app along these lines that they are seeking to basically replace the medical system down the lien. And they had plans to do this before Covid 19.
+
+In the US Eric Schmidt was in charge of the national security commission on artificial intelligence and they had a presentation that they authored in 2019 didn't come out till ayear later that said the changes tehy need to see in the implementation of emerging techhnologies had to happen in health care first, and we've seen that happen over the past year or so.
+
+` So tehy're using health car to get full control`
+
+Yeah, I think that's where t they've started they start to reimagine health care is a way of taking control of people's lives tell them it's for the colelctive for public health and their personal health, whereas it's realy a way to sort of implement these sort of transhumanist or technocratic technologies
+
+and google is heavily invested in all of this and they're actually partnered on a lto fo this with the US military so the fact that they're censoring stuff that goes against the narrative that they want to put forward, whether covid 19 or something ekse, shouldn't surprise anyone
+
+`Goiogle is invested in AZ?`
+
+Yeah, so the AZ vaccine they've been publicly framing for a long tim as non-profit that's not realy true bceause the two developers of that at the Jenner instiitute at Oxford have a company on which the techniology is based called Vaccitech and Google Ventures is one fot he main investors in that company, which is set to make a lot of profit as soon as they decide that the pandemic from their perspective has ended, and that declaration they can make as a company whenever they feel like it, actually.
+
+`What is your background?`
+
+Mint press news - became their senior investigative reporter - Did an Epstein article which got al to of buzz
+Started to do my own thing and partnered with The Last American Vagabond
+
+`We didn't - I didn't quite understand, how does this work - how can they end the pandemic, and what happens if they `
+
+Well it's how they set this up - they just declare it as that but htey don't need to make a public statement, and then they can start generating more of a profit than they have been.
+
+I should mention that in addition to google, the UK government is directly invested in Vaccitech and is expected to make a profit.
+The other main stakeholder is Bravos Capital, which if IMNMistaken which is set up by the former head of Global equity trading at Deutschebank
+
+`And also here you know that this Curevac which has the patents on teh BioNTech Pfizer vaccine, the German government had invested heavily in that`
+
+`So is that all, we have now three shareholders that have invested in Vaccitech`
+Well technically the bRavos investmentt is through Oxford Science Innovation. So they sort of hide it with some indirection.
+
+Sequoa capital Chinese branch and Fo Soom Pharma. And the Wellcome Trust, also.
+
+Wellcome Trust is intimiately involved with the AZ vaccine, period. They have some pretty disturbing eugenecists links.
+
+It's through Oxford Science the Wellcome Trust investment.
+
+`So this is somethign I have never heard, before - is this one of the major vehicles tha twe're discusison right now, in the context of this vaccine scheme?`
+
+Well, ti's specifically for the tech used in the AZ vaccine and they plan to use more vaccines with that and a lto of this produced at the Jenner institute because the people founded each. Conducting trials in Africa right now for a Universal malaria vaccine. Nasty track record, Jenner institute, lead by Adrian Hill, with being not quite honest with parents about the risk of vaccine I believe it was in South Africa about 7 infants died, and they new in advance the vaccine was ineffective before the trial adn they just did it anyway, and so of course the conclusion of tha ttiral was that it was ineffective even though they knew that well in advance.
+
+`And they still went forward with it?`
+
+In 2009, they have a track record of being very dishonest in their trials they also hid results of animal trials from parents.
+
+`What's the general purpose of the institute?`
+
+Well, so originally they were a public private partnership with Glaxo Smith Kline in the UK Gov in the 1990s, and eventually Glaxo Smith kiline pulled out and they were renamed in 2005 - one of the main vehicles at Oxford U for vaccine development
+but also more broadly for vaccine funding research ing eneral because Adrian Hill si also the chief person at the UK Vaccine Network which decides which vax to fund and give to public in UK and globally through Vaccine Philanthropy.
+
+`Are they independent or public?`
+
+It's part of Oxford University, it used to be a public/private partnership but Glaxo removed themselves.
+
+Wellcome Trust is named for Henry Wellcome and aprt of Glaxo Smith Kline  before the 1990s when they merged with Glaxo was the company Burroughs Wellcome.
+
+`This seems to be hte crowd that pushes AZ but then there's another crowd, probably around the Gates Foundation, that's pushing the mRNA vaccines`
+
+Yes, btu slightly different - if you notice over time the AZ vax has been banned in developed countries or restricted its use, mainly for elderly. In some countries they hav ebanned it outright. But Covax, the Gates backed effort to vaccinate the developing world, relies almost completely on AZ despite developments which led to developing companies eblieving it wasn't safe enough for use, but it's still good enough for Africa Latin aAmerican South east asia, India, so clearly that's a considerable double standard, and if you look into the history of the wellcome trust foundation and also the gates foundation and that's essentially experimenting on the developing world on things that predate covid considerably. Also broadly the pharmaceutical indsutry does this, like the polio vaccine, ti was previously a live-virus polio vaccine, and it was not discontinued despite the evidence that it was causing more vpolio than it prevents, it's actually still widely used in the developing world - including where I usedd to live in Chile.
+
+` I have another question this moderna and JJ, are these sort of backup vaccines? HOw do they play into this?`
+
+So, I know a lto more about the AZ vacc because I did a long report on it which got my deplatformed by Patreon.
+
+THE JJ vaccine, J&J has a pretty bad track record that looks very obvious whneever someone looks into pahrmaceutical companies. I think the mRNA vaccine is targeted for the developing world.
+
+I think ti was signifincant that J&J was manufactured in the US by emergent biosolutions, which previously was bioport, which was created as a spinoff of Port and Down of the UK, like a bio defense lab, with the former head of the US joint chiefs of staff under Ronald Regan. they were intimately involved with the 2001 anthrax attacks - the onyl way they could save their mandatory for US Personel Anthrax vaccine program. They were involved in scandals ever since but were still chosen to manufacture it in spite of that, and the person in charge of the manufacturing had no experience with that field whatsoever - his background was being head of military intelligence teams for the US in Iraq and Afghanistan - doesn't make sense that he would be in charge of that. These batches were ruined and unusable and who knwos what would have happened if anyoen would have used them. It's interesting that this company manufactured the vaccine. Also connected to CIA and military contractor in Ohio which has a lot of ties with Anthrax attacks as well.
+
+`I'm very interested in who's controlling the contents of the jabs - is there a control which is independent from the producer? Or is there a possibility - is there something very transparent controlling what is really in teh jabs - because we have a situation that it's all emergency stuff that is used now, so tmany controls are bypassed now - an dwe are a little bit suspicious that maybe the pharmaceutical industry or the industry for vaccines is using this possibility to find out what is possible with nucleic acid and with mRNA vaccines and all this stuff - because normally there are very strict rules when they wanted to use sucha  technology - and now they can do all they want so I would be very intested to see if somethign is scanning the patents that have been issued or asked for in this field - I think they msut have grown rather rapidly because tehre is sucha  chance to use this technology in many fields where it was a taboo before- Did they use this chance to make clinical studies under cover? funny pictures people putting metal on their vaccine site - and nothing declared about the contents that could explain this phenomenon - perhaps it's a fake, but I do not know - I thtink we should have some means to control what is really in the jabs - so we find out that there are some jabs where physiological sodium chloride water was in it and so it's maybe the conrtol they use when they want to trry out something - so they can just do everything now, they can make us the laboratory rats`
+
+Sounds like 2 questiosn.
+
+First thing, there needs to be more attention given to the manufacturers of the vaccine, because the developers just develop the formula whic his then given to the manufactureres who actually produce and create the vaccine that is injected into people.S o in the case of hte US the main manufacturer is that same company , Emergent Biosolutions which has an awful track record of you know they basically the pentagon lost a law suit in 2004 where they wer accused of using military personnel as lab rats in an off-label use of the vaccine they were producing - so they have a really nasty track record - the pentagon in the US is intimately connected to Bioport Emergent Solutions.
+
+In terms of the mRNA tech, I agree that they seized on this opportunity to use it more widely so the hidden hand i would argue again with the mRNA is once again the US military if you look at the Pfizer and Moderna they started with a significant investment in 2013 from DARPA the advanced research branch of the military - they are intimately involved in other ORwellian and ranshuanist technologies for US soldiers and also in general public - heavily invested in research regarding brain-machine interfaces, among other things - and a lot of people there are very extre e- they recentl teamed up with the Wellcome trust to create something called Wellcome leap-
+
+If you look abck a couple years when they're talking about Moderna in mainstream media - more health focused - they talked about how moderna had run into problems with their vaccine technology platform - they were highly secretive that even people who were interviewed for jobs had to sign non-disclosure agreements just for the interview with this company - and hte problem taht they back then was tha tthey couldn't get their vaccines because if they had too few nanolipid particles to deliver the mRNA the vaccine wouldn't wokr and if it was too high it ended up beign toxic to the people that received it - and there's no indication that the problem was ever solved by the time it was rolled out and essentially from that article in 2016 in a seubsequent one from Stat News which is as mainstrea as it gets in terms of health care - they basically said that Moderna needed some sort of saving-grace to save the company - becauase it was the most highly valued private company in biotech but had no products on the market just a lto on their pipeline and needed a way to get their products to hthe public.
+
+`DARPA in 2013`?
+
+Yes. And same with Pfizer's vaccine technology - developed with money and infleunce from DARPA. ANd the person who green-lighted the investments left in 2012 - investments not formally made util 2013 - Regina Dugan - who later left DARPA to basically create a DARPA equivalent for Google and later facebook as well and she is the one who teamed up witht he Wellcome trust to create this basically DARPA equivalent for the Wellcome Trust. Regina Dugan.
+
+`Was that after the Anthrax attakcs that they developed a vaccine?`
+
+No they had it before and it didn't work and was killign people, basically, and it was getting to the point wher ethey were tieing peopel down and forcefully injecting them.
+
+`How?`
+
+Meryl mass - sh eis the person to talk about all of that with - she was involved in the lawsuit that was brought against the government by military veterans - vaccine policy int he late 90s, 98 - when bioport was made and basically only had this one product. In sSeptember 2001 the pentagon was going to release a report about how to continue the vaccine policy without this company and their antrhax vaccine, and of course you have 9/11 happen so the report doesn't come out, and then the Anthrax attakcs happen, and suddenly the concern are replaced with wide calls to use it not only in the military, but in first-responders, police, teachers even
+
+`When did the accidents happen?`
+
+So it was announced the case in early October 2001, btu right after 9/11 people intimately tied to the Bush and Neocons wer talking abot how Al Quaeda were going to attack Americans with Anthrax and variosu things and I think the NY Times did 27 articles in a couple weeks about Anthrax and one of the main authors of those articles was Judith Miller who later received a fake anthrax letter in the attacks and she along with many top officials were involved in a simulation what would be the Anthrax attacks essentially called Dark Winter that took place in June 2001 and a lot fo people the same peopel who rpdouced the Dark Winter simulation and then later personally brief Dick Cheney about it are the same peopel that oversaw and moderated event 201 last year before the Coronavirus situation.
+
+`But this is not Johnson and Johnson, but emerging bio solutions`
+
+Yeah, who manufacture the Johnson and Johnson vaccine now
+
+`Wolfgang hypothesizes that vaccine rollout experiments the amount of lipid nanoparticles - asks about leaking`
+
+We don't know what they're doing with the vaccines in that sense, but what Moderna said specifically at least 2 years before Covid-19 was that this is a problem they have they could not solve. Now that it's used widely in emergency use authorization - tehy ahve a lot more leeway, potentially, to do so - would not surprise me - they were desperate as a company - if you want to get around that quickly, you need some type of crisis where they can obfuscate the nature of that issue
+
+`What do you think about these vaccines - since we know that we're not dealing with a medcial problem, in the sense that there si a full blown epidemic - there must be other - what's the agenda behind it? Financial, Eugenics, ? Military heavily connected with vaccines - is there are a conclusion that can be drawn?`
+
+I would argue so- what I mentiojned at the beginning, sort of the Silicon Valley push to redo healthcare - Precision medicine - they describe it as medications and vaccines and gene thereapies targeted to the individual - targeted to your genome - increase under the guise of COVID-19 testing - amass genetic data across the world - a lot of this is being held by the same silicon valley companies - western US - a lot of COVID-19 testing has been done by Verily - Google subsidiary - which is at the same tim trying to make their AI healthcare based on this genetic data - a lot of those same technologies come from the US military, or involve predictive diagnoses based on an AI algorithm - you are likely to have this disease, before showing symptoms, take their word for it - Co-developed by Google with the military - defense innovation unit - I would argue that the wide-ranging use of these mRNA vaccines and treating them as regular vaccines - instead of when they were previously in years past described by US media as gene therapy - a way to normalize the same kind of silicon valley precision medicine
+
+`So funny that we can observe in the legislation - 2009 Summer / July - German Bundestag changed the law to change the definition of vaccine - giving nucleic acids may not just be called genetic therapy but can be named vaccine - just before the German election (swine flu time) - they just changed it, so they opened the possibility to call this gene therapy "vaccines" if it is aimed to fight infections`
+
+Right, it's essentially the same thing, but part of a broader move to normalize this type of medicine - vocabulary normally associated with traditional medicine, but can apply it to things that are not traditional at all
+
+This gene editing, sort of push within medicine - if you look back to Julian Huxley, first director of UNESCO and former president of the British Eugenics society (which still exists today) - it's called the Galton Institute - renamed in 1989 - Adrian Hill of the Astrazeneca vaccine spoke at their 100 year anniversary, celebrating 100 years of eugenics, and the Wellcome Trust hosts their archive - which they think is of great use to medicine
+
+Going back to Julian Huxley he said in 1946 you should make the unthinkinable thinkable again and 10 years later he coined the term Transhumanism and said that gene editing as a science had to be applied with these new efforts to merge humans with machines as a way to create a new human being, or human being 2.0 , and that's when he coined the term transhumanist. So that's going back to 1957. New Bottles for New Wines?
+
+And then you have someone at the Galton institute, the Eugenics society, more recently, one of their board memebers, David Galton, publishing a book that was positively reviewed in the UK press about eugenics in teh 21st century, and front and center are these gene editing medicines.
+
+`Wasn't that in connection wtih the founding of UNESCO?`
+
+He was the founding director general of UNESCO.
+
+`So with this push for precision medicine, is this money-making? You can sell this targeted/tailored medicine. We are running into a big economic problem, so I can't see how people can pay for this medicine`
+
+I think it's about control and, at the end of the day, eugenics. I think they want to employ this medicine so much that I fully expect the Biden administration - Obama administration in the US funded a lot of these precision medicines considerably - Biden is going to be funding a Health DARPA that is going to be championed by Eric Lander, who has ties to eugenecists, was funded by JEffrey Epstein among all people - there is this push for socialized medicine, medicare for all, so they will allow that to take place but only if it's these precision gene-edited medicines that they will offer to people for free.
+
+`What role did Jeff Epstein play in this - he wanted to create new people with his own DNA?`
+
+Yeah, he wante to seed the human race with his DNA - he had a lot of ideas, but what's important is that now that he's gone, the scientists that he funded are still very m uch around - one of them, a key person, is someone like George Church who is a Harvard geneticist who has been openly accused of promoting eugenics in the mainstream press - he has promoted unethical human experimentation by trying to resurrect neandertals by implanting them into a human woman - and all of this stuff, really bizarre stuff, but he's actually pretty heavily promoted - what' sintresting about Epstein, is that yoyu have to look at something called the Edge foundation - operating as a front for Jeffrey Epstein, He was their only donor 2001 - 2017 - vast majority came from Epstein - a way for Epstein to gain influence over people both in silicon valley who were big into these, and a lot of geneticists at Harvard. Epstein was an operative - but I think thre's a couple of different things there - he woroked for more than one Intelligence Agency doing different things, but I think that honestly his main handler at the end of the day is going to be this group of Zionist billionaires called the MegaGroup - which is basically Lesley Wexner and the Bromfman family - both of whom have ties to organized crime, going back to the 20s and 30s, with considerable influence over Israeli politics. In terms of his involvement - he was involved in both the science and tech angles - but he definitely wasn't alone or the orchestrator - just a cog in the machine, as it were - people like Ghislaine Maxwell's sister, isabell maxwell, a WEF tech pioneer with ties to Israeli intelligence also intimately involved in aspects of that. And of course an Epstein associate whose ties they claim to be investigating right now, btu are actually covering up is someone like Bill Gates whose ties actually go back to the 1990s based on considerable evidence that mainstream media refuses to pursue.
+
+Evidence: if you believe the MM Narrative, they didn't meet until 2011, but there's a 2001 Evening Standard article written by a reputable reporter - never retracted - writen before Epstein was notorious for anything - which said that his main business partners were Lesley Wexner, Donald Trump and Bill Gates - you have at least one survivor Maria Farmer who worked for Epstein between 1995 and 1996 hearing them discuss Bill Gates as though they were good riends, and she expected Gates to visit one of Epstein's properties, though she didn't see him, btu they obviously were discussing him, they knew each other - There's also a documented relationship between Ghistlaine Maxwell's companies and Bill Gates specifically - 2001 Guardian article where Maxwell where she's very open abou thaving inherited the Israeli Espionage portfolio - called "Israeli's super spy" - Guardian's way of describing it - She starts purring when she talks about Bill Gates and starts talking in a fake southern belle accent, even though she has a British accent - she has never done this in any other interview - she said she prsonally persuaded him to invest to maintain his tax-free status - and his company com-touch which was basically a front for Israeli military intelligence - the only way he could have done that to be tax-free was to use hte Bill and Melinda Trust - Philanthropic investment vehicle - to invest in that particular company. Epstein had ties to Bill Gates' closest advisor - Nathan Mervald - who was also CTO at Microsoft. Throughout the 90s Epstein traveled with him to the Russia conference. In 1998 - and Mervald threw food on his plane several times - documented. He was seen taking underage women to Merval's offices for reasons we don't quite know - other executives there as well, and of course Epstein's science advisor in the 90s became Bill Gates' top science advisor by 2005 - Melanie Walker - and so if we are to believe that Bill Gates didn't know about Epstein until 2011.
+
+why would he hire a womna to be science advisor for his

new/difference_ideologies.md

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+Is there really a big difference?
+Religious Fanatics R
+Woke W
+Covidists C
+
+R1. All must subscribe and pray, or they are unholy and inviting evil into our shared environment
+W1. All must join in our anti-racist plight, or they are contributing to racism
+C1. All must participate in our proactive efforts to stop the spread of COVID, or they are actively potentiating and even directly involved in its propagating its trans
+mission.
+
+R2. All are cursed and contaminated by the devil and must denounce him.
+W2. All are infected with racism and must denounce their racism as a step towards becoming less racist
+C2. All are vectors for viral load and must take the vaccine to reduce the amount of virus they spread. Even the vaccinated are spreaders of the virus. All are to be re
+garded as contaminated with coronavirus and must take the first step towards reducing their viral load by taking the injection.
+
+R3. All must use the Holy Language, but make its associated declarations, lest they glorify devilry.
+W3. Don't microaggress, bigot.
+C3. Language must not give rise to vaccine hesitancy, must not vilify those who promote vaccination.
+
+of course, if you realy want to mitigate the tendency of religious fanaticism to become murderous and intolerant, you need open dialogue between persons of different be
+lief systems who cooperate in a society for the greater good of all
+
+of course, if you really want the most robust protection against racism, you need to have persons who freely use their minds to understand the futility of racism and pr
+omote universal truths which benefit everyone
+
+of course, if you want the most robust protection against pathogens, you need a population with comprehensive physiological expression, physiological overhead and compr
+ehensively adapted immune systems
+
+By @stronglogicp
+
+Take steps to be comprehensive
+
+ !
+°°°
+#covidism #religiousExtremism #religiousFanaticism #wokeism #criticalTheory #resistTyranny #totalitarianism #authoritarianism #freedom #believeInYourself #potentialForG
+enius #masterYourBody #masterYourMind
+
+## Opposing CRT
+- It is true that some of those who disagree with CRT are racists.
+- It is also true that all those who believe CRT accurately and adequately describes society are racists.
+
+It would be impossible for them to prove to themselves that they are an exception to the descriptions which apply to their age group. The description would have to be embodied and applied to their perception of the world in order for them to perform the act of evaluating and confirming their accuracy.
+
+For them to do this without being made to understand its inapplicability is, more directly, a confirmation that they, while believing themselves to be part of a group, agree that they think and feel as the CRT explicated illustration of presents them to think and feel. It is an expression of them embodying those thoughts, at the very least for the duration of that embodied assessment, and subsequent reflective confirmations, so long as those subsequent confirmations entail the requisite effort of producing a conception to make reference to, as opposed to a completely thoughtless and a track record of lazy confirmation.
+
+## Exceptions to the above

new/goingon_consequences.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+They go on about their days as though there's no material difference to what they've done - and what could be more apt? As surely, none of them will be able to know just what a difference it made for themselves. It could have been a placebo, for all they are concerned, and they would have still participated. They spent as little time as they needed to, as all do, and made their decision. The whole world supported them, and they couldn't be happier than they are to believe that their world is being delivered back to them, with no strings attached, except for those who dare to cause trouble.
+
+Why not play along with the rest of us? After all, it's for the common good! Who would be against the common good? Surely there is no good reason to deny the common good, no excusable reason, except, perhaps, if you were to come forward and admit that you have lost your strength of mind, and no longer trust your own thoughts. If you admit as such, you will be forgiven, but of course, the weight of your words will diminish and have no hope of raising even the mildst of enquiring eyebrows!
+
+No you, again, are to be relegated to a silenced, muted, half-peasant.
+
+There is no dialogue but what has been presented for you. No thought, except, that which ha been thought for you. The world is too complex to understand, but not because of your participation, but precisely because you don't participate. You see, it is by your very silence that the world is made better! Everything would be perfect, but for your existance.
+
+Can that realy be? Does anyone truly feel that way? Well, the best test, the highest standard we can devise to ask all the questions of whether things rae better wtihout someone's intervening, would be to see if those would also agree that the world would be better if they themelves did not exist:
+  - You can find those who agree, yet here hey are. So what of standards?

new/perfect_identity.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+Why bother to be any identity?
+
+Your existence is an identity, but if you take on someone's referenced conception of an identity, then you are actually posing your extant identity behind this more contrived one, and you also become a speaking / mouthpiece for whomsoever wishes to herald the referenced identity for their purpose and interest.
+
+It is always futile, as you - and this has already been elucidated countlessly elsewhere, but simply put - every humanly communicated reference of human conception is, by sheer instantiation, an incomplete, simplified estimation of neither what was intended, nor what was received, by whomsoever is being communicated to. So what is being communicated?
+
+A range of amplitudinally expressed permutations of physical conception (even just visual abstraction is a materially-dependent construct) which exists at the moment of time, occurring during the negotiation of its conception (as occurring through all those bearing the capacity to conceive of it at varying degrees of influence, which might not correlate to the potential capacity to conceive of it).
+
+So then it would seem that you have no ability to take control over the formulation of a human conception, but it's exactly the opposite. The only semantically accurate representation of your identity is your actual state of being, and it is perfectly evident/self-evident, requiring no further participation or resolution. In fact, by foregoing from attempting to fulfill one need to have its conception acknowledged, you strengthen the expression of your field of being into one which bears greater elegance and strength, which itself is communicated in its pure expression. There can be nothing greater than perfection, and no estimation is necessary as that which inevitably must occur in order to encode a communicable representation of it.
+

new/repugnant_demand.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+Utterly repugnant that they proceed in this way:
+"You hesitated because it wasn't authorized, so we went ahead and did all this great work just so you could have it authorized sooner! Why are you not grateful?"
+
+Of course, it was never based on whether it was authorized. Just because something is authorized for use does not mean that it's in my interest to have it administered. The whole apparatus is corrupt, with conflicts of interest, from vaccine research being funded by private organizations which invest in and donate to pharmaceutical companies, to pharma execs who worked for the FDA (SCOTT GOTTLIEB), or pharma execs who chair boards for media behemoths, or were previously mainstream media CEOs (James Smith). It also includes funding of regulatory bodies, awarding contracts to state commissioned research initiatives. Using public funds to develop products that are then not only sold back to them, but are assuredly done so through mandates, thereby securing a near limitless demand, with minimal marketing and public relations by these pharmaceutical companies. The process enabled by intergovernmental organizations that are themselves funded by ..
+
+Again, there can never be a mandatory medical procedure that can be ethical, as there can never be a worthy reason for which the default status of a human, who were brought into exsitence and made

new/short_notes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+# Perceptual Archetypes
+Perceptual frame, finitude, all things leading to contraint and suffocation, visualization of all threats lead tio enclosed conception -> moving inwards, restricting possibilities, governs our behaviour at a fundamental level.
+
+Our unique form -> bringing in or rejecting out.
+How we react must surely awlays consolidate this.
+
+Coupled with our social desire and history of manipulating groups through the types of stories which we naturally formulated archetypes around:
+- Religion, wokeism, covodianism
+- how to conquery this?
+- master the individual pursuits, training, visual freedom, learning a system of expression
+
+# Long Term Implications
+It was always about long term implications. Certainly, it could be that the jab works to prevent some severe disease, but then one would be choosing it to save themselves. Long term effects be damned, as well as any consideration as to how one's immune system is primed to behave differently. Long term fertility, cancer risk, neurological effects, immunity, cross reactive immunity, and so on -> these cannot be known, and any could take precedence over the benefit one might have in terms of mitigating severe disease from the target pathogen.
+
+# Profit
+So is it all just for profit, then? How does all this come to pass? Is it an explicit theft?
+
+Profit: Depends on what you mean
+
+Obviously, none of these undertakings are even viable if they cannot yield a profit, or the productive capacity wouldn't exist. These types of mechanisms are all set up as part of emergency preparedness planning, which is achieved through intergovernmental agencies at the global scale. That these agreements constitute a form of evidence supporting profit motive is akin to calling it a conspiracy. These are all things that can be organized in plain sight, therefore there are plenty of common sense reasons to excuse whatever formulations and agreements they produce.
+
+We have already heard key politicians declare that covid is a unique opportunity to initiate and advance operations otherwise unfeasible and unviable - we should stop our habit of failing to criticize demands and proposals under general fear of being labeled conspiracy theorist (CT), because we can see that there needn't be a conspiracy when those who stand to benefit garnish their bias with hubris as they gloat in open sight without the most minimal semblance of self awareness necessary to acknowledge the risks associated with gamefying situational response (in all its terms -> disaster relief, emergency preparedness, sustainable development, etc)
+
+So this brings us to the next question: why are we so uncritical? Who are we talking about?
+1. Do you support it?
+2. Conesquences of public visibility on the matter -> for each of previous response
+3. Means by which one is affected
+4. Aggregate effect towards overall bias
+
+In theory we could encode an algorithm to evaluate bias and capability towards forming opinions on matters, and one might say that that is what this totalitarian transformation is promising, and that that is actually a very good thing, because we can finally be granted a procedure for living our lives that is fair and ethical, but that is so obviously doomed to failure - perhaps best described as a position of faith:
+- They have faith that whoever produces the algorithm is objective
+- Faith that the algorithm will do precisely what it should
+- Faith that an algorithm can be created for this purpose
+- Faith that the algorithm written isn't one of several, any of which might be better, or they are all the same (functionally, or otherwise)
+- Faith that there is only one algorithm possible
+- Faith that writing an algorithm for a specific purpose produces the one intended and that our understanding of it does not change after its fruition
+
+No change in our depth of understanding of something which changes a macro position/fundamental position. Many of these things we pursue are of a quality such that it commits great cost to some (even all) in order to see it fulfilled - When are we being clear about teh costs of these things? About the fundamental restructuring of being itself? We are not just specifying our conditions of comfort and safety, we are specifying conditions of life and death at a time when these have largely been virtualized. Even just the manner in which we discuss these terms and learn / receive information.
+
+Now that we have have the opportunity to repeatedly see the matter being expressed in zero sum terms and do so ourselves with a virtually-derived aspect of anonymity, this all leads to a setting which more readily permits a virtual conception of the human mind, the human body, the human life and even the human soul. Should we not consider that this effect serves to make the value of life more arbitrary? Should we not ask ourselves:
+- Why is that?
+- Is that something we (I) are aiming at?
+- Is that what should be targeted?
+- To the exclusion of what? Human life? Net greater loss of life, for the benefit of order and predictability? Or the same loss / same distribution?
+
+You can't realy escape it - we need to be evaluating life with our every breath, and that value is itself a breathing phenomenon which aberates and oscillates and saturates and recalibrates a dynamic range of potential whose possible points of value / observation are themselves expessed as a permutation whose configuration is set by calibrated, permutated ranges of potential factors with possible weights of coefficients that are themselves evaluated by similar constructs on the order of infinity. So who downplays complexity, or acknowledges it while pretending to offer a solution which adequately resolves these concerns?
+
+It takes fundamentally consistent positions to maintain coherence in such systems of transformation. And fundamentally consistent positions can only be specified and ahered to by relying on terms and datum that are themselves as fundamentally concrete as possible.
+
+In most cases, however, it is impossible to keep close observation of the most fundamental scope upon which a system functions.

new/totalitarianism_.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+# Totalitarianism - Mass Psychosis
+
+## Truth
+Masses don't thirst for truth, turn from evidence and deify error if seduced by it. Their master supplies their illusions. Those who threaten the illusion are enemies.
+
+
+Our inability to dea lwith the force sof our psyche -> our own worst animals
+A man is a wolf to man.
+
+Woke-like tendencies come into play at those times if history when mental illness becomes the norm.
+
+Man himself is his own greatest danger. No adequate protection against psychic epidemics, which are the most devastating.
+
+The most dangerous: **The Mass Psychosis**
+
+epidemic of madness occurs when enough people lose touch with reality
+
+Descend into delusions
+
+20th century madness
+Scapegoats of societies gone mad
+
+In some swiss villages killed all women witch hunting
+
+Mass psychosis -> Jung studied this and said the infected individuals become morally and spiritually inferior. They sink intellectually and become unreasonable. Crimes not tolerated by individuals become performable by groups.
+
+Triggers of madness exist, but those aren't conducive to mass psychosis
+
+Psychogenic triggers -> most common culprits of mass psychosis
+
+FLood of negative emotions -> fear and anxiety -> state of panic
+
+Individuals seek relief in panic.
+
+Escape through adaptive means -> facing to and defeating threat
+Other way -> psychotic break. Not descent into disorder, but a re-ordering of one's experential world (blend of fact and fiction -> for everyone, in fact).
+
+Schizophrenia expert -> psychogenic states
+
+1. Panic: perceives thigns in a different way. frightening confusing etc how to explain it?
+2. Psychotic insight: puts things togheter by devising a pathological way of seeing reality which explains the abnormal exeperience. Based on delusion: Population of weak and vulnerabel individuals are driven into panic -> mass psychosis -> they buttress one another and reinforce one another's delusion
+
+
+Totalitarianism
+Modern phenomenon of total centralized state power and obliteration of individual human rights. Those in power and the objectified masses.
+
+Population in two groups: rulers and ruled. Both group undergo pathological transformation. Rulers are Gods -> diametrically opposed to us as imperfect beings corrupted by power. Masses are transformed into the dependent subjects of the rulers. Take on a regressive and child-like status.
+
+Totalitarianism is an attempt to transform human nature itself. Turns sound minds into sick minds.
+
+There is in fact mjuch that is comparable between the strange reactions of the citizens of totalitarianism and the culture as a whole on the one hand and the reactions of the sick schizophrenic on the other.
+
+Social transformation -> built upon and sustained by delusions. Deluded men and women regress to child status, suibmissive subjects. Han dover control of their lives to another class.
+
+The romance of power-hungry elites and a psychologically damaged population.
+
+What triggers the psychosis of totalitarianism?
+
+The mass psychosis of totalitarianism begins in the society's ruling class, who are prone to delusions which augment their power.
+Political ideology grants them the delusion that they can and should control. This biases them to be more accepting of proposed actions that make the masses more dependent.
+
+Menticide begins with fear.
+Flood with negative emotions also anxiety -> susceptible to descent into delusion
+Threats can be fabricated and used to sow fear -> but very effective is to use waves of terror -> contrasting waves of fear and calm, with each wave of fear increasing in intensity
+
+People are disturbed by their previous experience. Morality becomes lower and lower with each wave, and the psychological effects become stronger. Reaches a public already softened up by the next iteration.
+
+Propaganda to spread misinformation, rbeak down the mind of the masses. Government officials and media use contradictory reports, nonsensical information, blatant lies. Confuse and make population less capable of coping with crisis -> unable to use adaptive behaviour to counter their fear.
+
+Descent into delusions of totalitarianism. Logic can be met with logic, but illogic cannot be met with logic. It confuses those who think straight.
+The big lie monotonously repeated nonsense have more of an emotional appeal than logic and reason. People still search for reasonable counter-argument for the first lie while the next one comes along.
+
+Joost Merloo. rape of the mind.
+
+Algorithms censor flow of unwanted information, this controls the availability of information, and the hierarchy of access to information.
+
+Modern technology teaches man to take for granted the world he is looking at. EH takes no time to retreat and reflect. Technology pulls him in. No rest, no meditation, no reflection, no conversation the senses are continually overloaded withs timuli. Man doesn't learn to question anything anymore.
+
+Isolate the victims to disrupt normal social interactions. Alone, an individual becomes more susceptible to delusions for several reasons:
+
+1. Lose contact with corrective force of positive examples
+2. Human beings are more easily conditioned into new patterns of thought in isolation: pavlov made discovery -> conditioned reflex easier in laboratory setting. isolation and patient repetition of stimuli tames wild animals.
+3.

new/vaccine_policy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+Vaccine policy is the most important aspect of fiscal and monetary policy?
+
+Let us examine:
+
+1. Produces a resource which also supports many forms of secondary economic processes:
+  - manufacturing
+  - distribution
+  - medical service
+  - follow-up -> communication,
+  - statistics
+
+2. Reduces strain on system -> hospitalization / ICU / Ambluance
+
+3. Incentivizas government to reopen economy,
+4. Incentivizes public to participate in the economy