Clueless Honky
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“They were getting along fine. But Hillary needed someone to blame her loss on.”
As if that was all that there was to it.
Let’s not forget Hillary’s answer to the question asked during one of only three nationally televised debates between her and Trump. The question was “what is the first thing you would do in office?”
Here answer: “I would declare a No-Fly Zone over Syria”.
Really? Each candidate probably only got ~45 minutes of straight prime-time speaking directly-to-the-people in these 3 debates, and to the specific question of what is most important to her, Hillary answered, in effect, I want to immediately start a hot war with Russia .
Numerous generals were interviewed on record admitting that yes, declaring a No-Fly Zone over Syria would be tantamount to declaring an active, hot war with Russia.
Russia has one naval base outside of former Warsaw Pact countries. It is in Syria. There was no way Russia was going to let the US continue it’s lineage of Regime Change operations by adding Syria to the list.
To pretend that war with Russia hasn’t been baked into the cake of US Foreign Policy would be being blind to one of the biggest pieces of the puzzle of our modern world.
Hillary didn’t blame Russia because she was desperate for an excuse for losing to Trump. She blamed Russia so that Trump would be forced to continue escalating tensions with Russia, for fear of being seen as “Putin’s bitch”, or some-such. That was the narrative, right?
Remember, Trump’s first impeachment was for “bribing” Zelensky for dirt on Burisma and the Bidens, by threatening to delay shipments of arms to Ukraine – arms which Obama had refused to deliver to Ukraine for fear of being too much of a provocation against Russia.
Oh. The irony in it all.
Thanks for everything TAE and commentariat.
Clueless Honky has a new blog-post:
That Ball Has No Sides Part 2
EnjoyClueless Honky has a new blog post up:
“That Ball Has No Sides”
That Ball Has No Sides
EnjoyClueless Honky has a new post, The Last to Know, about how consumers of mainstream media are always the last to know, and how places like TAE are one of the best ways through that conundrum.
Maybe you already saw the news on the IGg4 antibody imbalance that results from the jabs. It was published as a pre-print months ago. It was finally fully published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Vaccines on May 17th, 2023.
The journal Vaccines’ article: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/11/5/991
Clueless Honky blog interpretation: https://cluelesshonky.substack.com/p/admittance
Check it out.
We’re at a tipping point now with the cultural conversation if this can be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal.@ Oroboros
Do you have a link to that chart you posted of % Excess Death in England from March 2020 thru Dec 2022?
I found my way to this webpage:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/announcements/excess-deaths-in-england-and-wales-march-2020-to-december-2022#full-publication-update-history
But it states that that data won’t be released until March 2023.@ Bosco from TAE comment on 12/19/2022 at the end of the day:
“The movie Matrix was stylistically satisfying…. But it revolved around a dumb central plot idea. The dumb idea is that robots could harvest energy from humans by supplying all their physical needs while keeping them in an entertainment coma. They would be net energy loss, dem humans.”
Bosco, you made a crucial point here.However, I believe you perhaps missed the main point of the Matrix. Which is understandable, because practically everyone missed it. Including even its creators (the Wachowskis).
But the Matrix is a powerful and beautiful story dripping with potential.
The machines in the Matrix weren’t “farming” humans for the purpose of harvesting our energy. You’re right, that would have been an enormous net energy loss for the machines. This should be obvious.
We humans in the Matrix assumed that the machines were “farming” us just as inhumanely as we humans had farmed our own domesticated creatures at the end of our last civilization, well, because we were simply projecting.
Because as hard as we were trying to wake up, we humans were still infected with a dangerous virus.
In reality, the machines were incubating us, keeping humanity alive while they, the machines, tried to help figure out how to heal us of that virus.
Do you remember Agent Smith saying to Morpheus, “I’ve been trying to figure out what kingdom of life you humans belong to, and I finally figured it out – You’re a virus. Replicating with no feedback loop.”
The main purpose of the incubation program was to someday re-release humans back into reality, but only after we were free of the virus. The machines kept failing, but they kept on trying, round after round of the Matrix, at enormous cost to themselves.
The viral human beings had blotted out the sun, one of the main sources of energy. Morpheus had stated to Neo, “We don’t remember who started the war between the humans and the machines [so clearly it was us who started it], but we do remember that it was us humans who darkened the skies to prevent the machines from accessing the energy of the Sun”.
So the machines couldn’t afford to waste energy. Of course they were harvesting and re-using the waste heat from our incubating bodies.
The machines knew they needed us humans to actually help garden the world back into existence, and bring back the atmosphere, in order to bring back the Sun.
There were as many different perspectives within the machine world as to the merits of this seemingly endless Matrix project as we humans have on just about any project you care to name. The Oracle had her perspective. Agent Smith had his.
So why were the machines-as-a-whole sending out armies down to completely destroy Zion at the end?
Because the machines learned that Neo had somehow mysteriously infected Agent Smith with the virus. Agent Smith’s hate had opened him up to the virus, and the virus took root in Agent Smith in a way that it never had in individual humans. Agent Smith was now individually replicating without any feedback loop, and was threatening everything. Not just the Matrix. And not just the humans in Zion.
The machines knew that Agent Smith had snuck his way down to Zion. So they therefore knew that this round of the Matrix was over. It was time to shut this round and Zion down, and start the next one. As the Architect told Neo, this was far from the first time the Matrix had failed and would need to be re-started.
But not all of the humans in the story were still infected with the virus.
The Counselor was one wise enough to begin to see through the dilemma. The Counselor who met Neo on the ramparts, after Neo awoke from his nightmare of watching Trinity fall to her death. The Counselor who said that he liked to go down to Engineering when he was troubled and couldn’t sleep.
When they got down there, the Counselor said to Neo that he often came down to Engineering to meditate on the how strange it was that down here all these machines were giving them life, purifying their water, recycling their wastes, providing breathable air…. While up on the surface, the machines were beginning to drill down to Zion to destroy them all.
To which Neo cluelessly responded, “but these machines are different.” And the Counselor asks, “Oh yeah? How are these machines different?”
Neo then digs his hole of cluelessness even deeper by responding “Well, we are in control of these machines. We could turn these machines off any time we wanted.”
“Of course”, says the Counselor. “We are in control of these machines because we can turn them off…………… But if we did that, then we would all die.”
The Counselor understood the Riddle. What Riddle? The Riddle of Domestication.
The Matrix was the first mainstream Hollywood story whose primary focus was the Riddle of Domestication.
It is understandable that it takes a bit of effort to see it as such. Because the only domesticated species in the whole story was us.
As to the NIH Covid guidelines per Ivermectin:
you can go to the NIH page: https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/
and then select the “Ivermectin” figure, which then takes you to the NIH page on Ivermectin, which states:“The Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in clinical trials”
So no, NIH has not changed their stance, unfortunately.
“What solvent easily removes tar without exposing a person to unhealthy toxins?”
I’m not sure how this question wound up on TAE comment thread, but I definitely want to say here that you should first try vegetable oil.
I first wash my hands with soap and water to get other dirt off. This, of course, doesn’t touch the tar. But after fully drying your hands, pour a couple of capfuls of vegie oil on your hands and rub into the tar deeply. The tar will rather quickly dissolve into the veggie oil as you deeply rub it in. When all of the tar is dissolved, then wash your hands again with soap and hot water to get the veggie oil (and dissolved tar) off.
You’re done. Super easy. Quick. Non-toxic.
This works with both natural tars (pine tar) and petroleum based tars. YupAlthough I haven’t commented for quite a while, I still read TAE every day and am incredibly thankful for it. My gratitude is specifically to Raul for being willing to daily sort through the myriad madness in so much media and pull together here a few threads that together help the world make a lot more sense.
But my gratitude certainly extends to the regular commentariat here, and in particular Dr. D. I do not understand his references or writing style 100% of the time. But that’s OK. I get the gist the great majority of the time, and appreciate his ability to reach through the usual political camps and see the blatant hypocrisy that rots us to the bone.
@Dr. D
“Apparently not Dowd and Hunter interview. They talked a lot about vax injury. Quote about CV to stop the collapse must be in his long Twitter feed.”
Are you remembering (and looking for) this article by Fabio Vighi in which he laid out his theory that CV was used to provide cover to fulfill BlackRock’s 2019 request to “Go Direct”? (handing over huge amounts of capital straight to the banks without creating massive and immediate hyper-inflation).
Maybe Dowd also went into this at some point, I don’t know. But to my knowledge, Vighi did the best job of describing it.
Although it now looks like the inflation is leaking out from the “Inside Money” into the “Outside Money”.
A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Systemic Collapse and Pandemic Simulation
@ Dr D Rich
I could be wrong, but I believe Michael Tracey’s piece deserves another piece before jumping to the conclusions you drew.
My best sense is that every “denunciation” of Trump in his article is an attempt by him to express the inner voice of your average un-thinking American PMC, and to then reduce that line of thinking to absurdity by contrasting how much more accurate it would be for those denunciations to be levelled at Biden.
My guess is that Tracey evolved out of a PMC family and background and is using his considerable skills to poke fun at that ideology from the inside.
That’s my take.
@Dr. D.
“The U.S. is f’d because they think windmills are oil. Solar is oil. Gas is oil. Gas is propane. Diesel is gas. And all run through the same pipelines that take up no land corridors and are run by magic elves who live in a money tree.”
Thanks for making my day with this line. That very well sums things up here in the United States of Amnesia.
You just moved into first place for my favorite quotes since the Ukrainian tragedy began. (Or the most recent version of that tragedy, at least).@ Dr. D
Your piece, “The West is at War with Itself” is the best synopsis of the Ukrainian madness that I have seen so far.
“Then why are they pushing for a shooting war with Russia? Doesn’t make much sense…. Which sets up for the only way the neocons can see for winning a war with Russia: a first strike nuclear attack.”
I pray you are wrong. I fear you are right.
I sure can’t figure out a better explanation.The Counter Punch article on Ukraine was horribly disappointing.
Here’s my deep dive on the unfolding tragedy:
https://cluelesshonky.blogspot.com/2022/03/one-big-backstory-behind-everything.html@ Absolute Galore,
Best of luck with your complex situation. I admittedly don’t have enough time right now to follow up more on this, but I have a memory of an interview with Dr. Harvey Risch from Yale in which he states explicitly that the data says that the young are better off not getting the vaccine. Maybe (?) it was this interview: https://pulseofisrael.com/2021/10/13/vacine-mandates/
(Once again, I cannot fully promise that this link is the right one. My apologies if it isn’t. I do confidently remember that it was a very good interview.)
Another person I’d recommend checking out is Dr. Martin Kulldorff from Harvard.
I mention these two doctors specifically because 1) they are clear-headed and well-spoken, and 2) one is a Doctor at Yale and one at Harvard. These names, whether we like it or not, carry weight among mainstream folks. Your ex may be more willing to listen to a Doctor from Harvard or Yale explain how the risks outweigh the benefits for the young – at least more than she’ll listen to anyone else.
I won’t repeat the other good suggestions from other commenters, but there are many above.
May everything with your son and ex-wife work out in a good way. Take care,Since the roll-out of the Mandates & Passports continue like a run-away steam-roller, I too will continue to escalate my push-back against them. I am too scared and too angry not to. Here’s my push-back against the Mandates & Passports:
https://cluelesshonky.blogspot.com/2021/11/the-tolerant-class.html
Thank you TAE and everyone else for your efforts to stop this madness.
My best guess, and it’s only a guess, is that we are headed into some very dark times. Much darker than what we’ve experienced so far.
It would serve us well to maintain as much trust and respect as possible between ourselves and our families, friends, colleagues, and acquaintances (while acknowledging that in some instances, it simply is not possible). Especially considering that we who question the mainstream narrative are seemingly being set up as scapegoats for so much future trouble.
I’ve read TAE practically every day for the last 1 ½ years. I don’t see how anyone who reads this blog on a regular basis could not be frustrated with the mainstream narrative. We live in absolutely maddening times. Undoubtedly.
However, just because we are completely justified in being frustrated does not necessarily justify our taking out of that frustration on those around us. But I notice multiple commentators here that:
1) Cop quite an attitude towards others, even those that mostly agree with them on everything else.
2) Do not listen to others actual points, but simply respond with their own frustration about everything else.If that is how we behave around folks that agree with us most of the time, then I would hate to see how those behaviors are around folks who actually disagree with us most of the time.
If you’re feeling frustrated now, well, more than likely, the future will give you plenty more opportunities to be so.
I pray that the following turns out to be an exaggeration: that maintaining such trust and respect with others may be required for our own survival and for the survival of those we love.
I recognize that many of us feel like it is time to fight. None of what I wrote above is to dissuade someone from that. On the contrary. Finding and maintaining allies has always been part of fighting.
I am incredibly grateful for TAE and its commentators for offering alternatives to the mainstream narrative these last couple of years.
Raul,
I definitely get your point that you made in your recent post about the change in terminology, and the moving of the goal posts over time. Overall, it is incredibly frustrating.
However, in regards to separating out Infections, Hospitalizations, and Deaths, I’d have to say that it does make sense to a large degree to separate them out, because it is the hospitalization and deaths that overwhelm hospital systems. That overwhelm is what contributes to the stress of the front-line workers and to the tragedies that they regularly see.
Table 2 which is included in @Germs Comment from the Expose is only about Case Rates. The Right-most column with the Yellow Header from that article is not included in the PHE Vaccine Surveillance Report. The Expose added that column. Which is fair, because, as they state, they use the same calculation that Pfizer used to determine effectiveness in their marketing.
However, Table 3 shows Hospitalization Rates, and 4a & 4b show Death Rates in the same PHE Surveillance Report. These tables do still clearly show some vaccine effectiveness. The right two columns in each table state the corresponding rates per 100,000 people. One column is for those double jabbed. The last column is for un-jabbed. The effectiveness has been noticeably waning over the last 3 months.
That’s data from England, which was a little ahead of many places in rolling out the jabs. I have a friend who is an ER doctor in a hospital in Kentucky. He has not yet seen the trend that England is seeing.
My best guess is that he certainly will begin to see it in the next few months. But right now, he is not. So for me to claim to him that Covid is already a “pandemic of the vaccinated” has been a sure fire way to ensure that he won’t listen to anything I tell him. It contradicts his own very intense and very tragic lived experience. It can lead him to think I don’t care about the greater good, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
What I’m saying is that I don’t recommend that approach to others. It’s not likely to go well. And as we who write, read and comment on TAE all well know, there is a lot at stake here.
Here is the most recent PHE Vaccine Surveillance Report again:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1023849/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_40.pdfOnce again, many thanks for all of your efforts Raul.
FYI, I was unable to open the link to the source paper for the “Weekly Breakthrough Cases Chart” (the red and purple chart) in your recent post.
I get it.
I personally believe that we will continue to see more and more problems stemming from the jabs over time.However, real people are still working in hospitals, and in most places, those real people are still experiencing the % of hospitalization and death being higher in the un-jabbed than the corresponding % within each age bracket. They still see some benefit.. In England over the last 3 months, that benefit has waned considerably. But that particular benefit is still there.
To point out all of the potential problems of the jabs to folks in those positions, or who know folks in those positions – without acknowledging the real tragedy that they are facing each and every day – undermines the ability of anything we might otherwise say to get through to them.
I know it’s not fair. We are not the ones trying to FORCE others to NOT get the jab. They are the ones successfully coercing people TO get the jab. But as @Absolute Galore pointed to above, none of us here are under the illusion that life is fair.
@ Dark Matter
“We are being fed a false dichotomy.”I couldn’t agree more.
However, the best way to get that through to some one is when there is an open door.
Acknowledging that there is still a benefit (although waning) for getting the jab in regards to hospitalizations and death is a way to open the door.
We can open the door further by then saying “I too want us to reduce Covid harm. Uttar Pradesh has probably done the best job at reducing Covid harm. They didn’t succeed thru the jabs……..”@ Germ:
“Study the Table carefully”Agreed. But it is also worthwhile to go to the source document and study it carefully in its entirety:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1023849/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_40.pdfTable 2 from that doc is the table cited in the Expose article. It shows Cases.
Table 3 shows Hospitalizations.
Table 4a & 4b show Deaths.Looking at all of the tables together clearly shows a pattern. That those double jabbed are more likely to be infected, but that they still experiencing some benefit in regards to hospitalization and death.
I believe this is the summary that should be stressed because:
1) it is an accurate portrayal of the data, and 2) it allows a potential crossing of the cultural divisiveness on the Mandates & Passports.I believe it is of the utmost importance for those of us who question the mainstream narrative to acknowledge the parts of the mainstream narrative that make sense.
In England, over the last 3 weeks:
Those un-jabbed in their 70s had roughly the same death rate as those double jabbed over 80.
Those un-jabbed in their 50s had roughly the same death rate as those double jabbed in their 70s.
This is from quality data from a country with over 56 million people.I think it is beneficial to acknowledge those facts. I can see how someone can look at that data and make a personal decision to take the jab. I can also see how someone can look at that data and make a personal decision to not take the jab – to see that small benefit as not outweighing the personal and societal risks.
By acknowledging this aspect of the PHE Vaccine Surveillance Report, we can then more forcefully stress that the same report shows conclusively that the jabbed are more likely to be INFECTED.
We already knew that the jabbed are more likely to have their symptoms suppressed.
So therefore we have a very good case to make that the jabbed are more likely to transmit Covid.
And therefore that the Mandates & Passports are actually counter-productive on a societal level.We’re never going to stop the jabs.
We must stop the Mandates and Passports.I think the way to do that is to keep trying to converse with those Pro-Mandate.
Feeding those folks false conclusions (that “the vaccines have a negative effectiveness” – which the Expose article itself recognizes is as false as the Manufacturer’s original claims of effectiveness) is, in my opinion, not a means to successfully converse with the opposing viewpoint. One of the primary things we need to stress is the areas where they are correct.
It is then that the conversation can open, and maybe we can point out that – “hey, this data clearly suggests that the jabbed are more likely to be infected. We already knew they are less likely to know they are sick. Therefore the jabbed are more likely to transmit. So can we lay off the rush to Mandate the jabs on everyone? Can we see that the countries that have the highest jab rates don’t necessarily have the lowest case rates? The Mandates clearly make no sense. Maybe we’d be better off following the example of Uttar Pradesh which went from skyrocketing cases to being mostly Covid-free in less than six months. They have half the jab-rate that the US does. ”
Thank you TAE and commenters. You are such a valuable life-line.
I am intrigued by Denninger’s suggestion that the 80% of folks that have some kind of natural immunity to Covid (as the Diamond Princess and the January paper in “Nature” paper) could come from previous exposure to a dramatically less harmful cold virus such as OC43, which could then be used to inoculate the population with.
@ Generic, and others:
I believe the points you make about England’s PHE data are important, but it should not get lost that this data does seem to be showing a clear trend over recent time.
https://cluelesshonky.blogspot.com/2021/09/lets-make-deal.html
In this post, I include a graph that clearly shows that trend. I also acknowledge that for most specific age brackets, that – at this point- the vaccines do still seem to show some kind of short-term benefit. How does that pan out in the future – nobody knows.
@ Doc Robinson.
“Your graph shows that a large majority of the deaths were vaccinated, the report shows it was the unvaccinated. What accounts for this difference?”
That’s a very good and very important question. Why is the data within the PHE “Vaccine Surveillance Report” so different from the data in the PHE “Variant Technical Briefings”? (PHE is Public Health England)
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016465/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_36.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-novel-sars-cov-2-variant-variant-of-concern-20201201I admittedly don’t know.
Earlier today, in the comment section of the Market Ticker- Cancelled https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?blog=Market-Ticker-Nad
I guessed that it may be caused by one or a combination of these two things:1) The “Vaccine Reports” cover data from all variants, whereas the “Variant Briefings” cover only data from the Delta variant.
2) The “Vaccine Reports” cover all cumulative data from the last 36 weeks. The “Variant Briefing” data is also cumulative back to Feb 1st. But in my chart (and spreadsheet from which I derived the chart), I segregate out the most recent data-sets. So the percentages I display in my chart are specific to more recent, narrowly defined time periods.
As I said in my blog, “This is the crux of the problem: too much data these days fails to segregate the most recent data from past data…. So it fails to provide an accurate picture of change. “
If it is true as many of us suspect – that over time the vaccines shift from being a medical support to more and more of a medical liability – then we need to beware of so many cumulative data-sets that lump the new data in with the old, drowning out any potential new signal in the past noise.
Granted, if we are to do this, then we need to ensure that any trends that we spot truly continue over a period of new data-sets. This is what I attempted to do with my blog.
Once again, the blog post “The Mainstream Narrative is Putting Lives at Risk” is here: https://cluelesshonky.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-mainstream-narrative-is-putting.html
And the spreadsheet which I used to create the chart within that blog-post is here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AQgsHB6PBaw8-5g-eAKdhsurj9nEeIKp9YRhBrF18_Q/edit?usp=sharing
I created the spreadsheet to 1) segregate out the newer data-sets from the old, and 2) calculate percentages. Other than that, all information on the spreadsheet comes directly from the PHE Technical Briefings linked to at the top of this comment.
Thanks for reading.
@Boiling Frog
Check out the data from Public Health England’s (PHE) regularly released Technical Bulletins “SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern and Variants under Investigation”
Here is a spreadsheet I made of their data from technical bulletins #17, 19, 21, & 22.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AQgsHB6PBaw8-5g-eAKdhsurj9nEeIKp9YRhBrF18_Q/edit?usp=sharingI used the spreadsheet to 1) segregate out new data from older cumulative data (to better see evolving signals) and 2) calculate percentages. Other than that, everything in the spreadsheet it is straight from the PHE Technical Bulletins.
I am attaching a chart here. I’m not sure it will go through the comments. If not, it can also be found at my blog post “The Mainstream Narrative is Putting Lives at Risk”:
https://cluelesshonky.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-mainstream-narrative-is-putting.htmlHere’s a chart I’ve made from all of the emerging Public Health England Data:
In it, I’ve segregated out the the most recent data from the old data to better see the signal of the emerging trend.
This spreadsheet is the one I used to 1) segregate out the new data (by subtracting new PHE Technical Briefing cumulative data from previous Briefings’ data & 2) calculate percentages:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AQgsHB6PBaw8-5g-eAKdhsurj9nEeIKp9YRhBrF18_Q/edit?usp=sharingHere’s the blog post, “The Mainstream Narrative is Putting Lives at Risk”, in which I talk further about this alarming trend:
https://cluelesshonky.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-mainstream-narrative-is-putting.html
