Category Archives: The Coronavirus Apocalypse

TWAT News: Prince Harry Implies Beer-Virus a Punishment From Mother Nature

If the idea of a human-led monarchy didn’t have its flaws, there wouldn’t have been much call for todays constitutional governments. For example, if an absolute monarch was completely out of touch with reality, there would be little expectation of a prosperous society.

So, when royalty such as Prince Harry suggests that the novel coronavirus is a punishment from a nature deity, that really makes one grateful for the Magna Carta, and its enduring legacy.

That’s just what happened; Prince Harry suggested that COVID-19 was Mother Nature’s way of punishing people for being so mean to the environment.

That’s really interesting, because I had the idea that the virus originated in China, either from a filthy wet-market, or from incompetence in a bio-research lab, and the Chinese Communist Party isn’t being open about it because they’re famously unreliable when it comes to anything that can make them look bad (also, they don’t understand how to run a society, which makes the CCP like every communist ever).

Harry then went on to make the case that people should to more to benefit the environment, complete with inane analogies and obtuse non-sequitors. Among these was comparing people to raindrops.

I don’t know, and I don’t care to try to interpret just what he was attempting to say. What I do know is that Prince Harry has a political ideology that goes after ordinary members of the population to recycle every last plastic bottle, in spite of the fact that households produce only about 1% of recyclable waste. But that did nothing to stop him from purchasing a sprawling estate, like other environmentalists such as Barack Obama and Bob Dole, enjoying having as many as 16 bathrooms in these estates. Of course, the fact that these people buy private jets doesn’t mean they’re not opinionated about you driving a car and eating real beef.

You know, the ol’ rules for thee, but not for me.

Nature worshippers, including those who treat “Mother Nature” as a literal personal entity, are living a collective delusion. A person can learn a lot about nature just by reading a guide on how to identify edible plants. In so doing, a person would learn that a day in the woods is not like a trip to the supermarket. The fact is, nature doesn’t give a care about us, not nearly enough to make it easy to tell the difference between a plant that lets us live another day or poisons a person dead.

It’s because of this that the human relationship with nature is one of mistrust, and as soon as we developed the capability to subdue it, we were right to do so.

There is something about neo-environmentalism that’s unsettling, and that’s the creepy undertone that views humans as the bad guy, or that the growth of the human population is something to respond to with tighter top-down controls, with deference to the will of wealthy coastal technocrats, moral authoritarians, and the other unsavory forms of scientism. While they have no problem with telling the rest of us how to live our lives, one simple question makes them disintegrate like vampires in daylight:

If you think this is such a good idea, why aren’t you doing it?

Odds are it’s because the political elites don’t want to live in one-bedroom apartments, subsisting on cheap pasta and taking mass-transit to work a minimum-wage job. Political elites like Prince Harry, Barack Obama, and Bob Dole consume immensely more than the average ordinary human being living today, and they prefer to keep it that way.

I wonder whether Greta Thunberg is aware that this is the case? Maybe that girl should be more careful about who she plays with.

So, how about it, hyper-rich environmentalists? Why not be the change you want to see, if it means anyone will take you seriously? What’s stopping you? It’s obvious what the answer is, and that’s that you still want more than the average person.

So, here’s an idea: let’s reward a person proportionately based on their contributions to society. That way, a person would have more if they earn it, based on what they do. If this were the system that were in place, then how would you justify having more than someone else?

Hard question? I’ll go first. I produce circuit boards that have defense and aerospace applications. What I do is difficult to become qualified to do, with about two-thirds of those who attempt the degree failing or dropping out. What I do, without question, makes the world a better place. I want a house, a couple cars, and the means to support a family well in excess of the replacement rate. I’ve earned it.

So, what does the typical hyper-rich environmentalist do? It’s not so much a question of whether they work for a living as it is whether they’ve worked at all. In fact, if people stopped paying taxes, they wouldn’t have any income. Outside of foreign energy investments, just ask Hunter Biden.

The coronavirus epidemic has been played for political purposes, and a nature deity had been brought into it. That Was Actually The News.

Supreme Court Upholds Religious Protections in Face of COVID Lockdowns

In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court of the United States blocked the state of New York’s restrictions on in-person attendance for religious gatherings. This was among the first major rulings which involved the newly-appointed Amy Coney Barrett, who sided with the Constitution on this matter in what is now a 6 to 3 conservative-majority Supreme Court.

The ruling seemed an obvious consequence of interpreting the first amendment of the Constitution, the first of a list of Bill of Rights that collectively act as the superordinate principles that govern the relationship between the U.S. government, state governments, and individual members of the population.

While it’s no surprise that the three “liberal” judges ruled as they did, it’s disappointing that a conservative judge, Chief Justice John Roberts, sided against the Constitution in this regard. Considering the value of the Constitution in American society, none of the judges should side against the Constitution in any case.

The text of the first amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The law specifically precludes the U.S. government or the states from favoring one religious organization over another, and protects the right of the people to assemble peaceably. This is especially relevant to the Orthodox Jews who complained of the restrictions, and also claimed that they were specifically targeted. Recent restrictions on the number of people allowed in religious gatherings in light of the coronavirus epidemic limited religious gatherings to 25 attendees, or more recently, to ten.

As a personal observation, as I read the language of the first amendment, and see the common themes of the activities and parties mentioned, I get the idea that the government is not to be involved in ideological influencing of any kind towards the population. Protections for religious groups and the press carries a strong implication of this. If this is the case, this would mean that psy-ops historically conducted on U.S. citizens should be strictly illegal. Though, to be fair, private organizations go much further in this regard than institutions of the U.S. government. Anyone who cares to name some examples are free to do so in the comments below.

The Supreme Court pointed out that “even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here… strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty.”

As the BBC pointed out, the ruling won’t have an immediate impact, as the parties that filed the complaint are no longer under the restrictions that they contested.

Disturbingly, as the coronavirus lockdowns demonstrated, it is possible for state governors to enact orders that are in direct violation of the constitution, and for the unlawful orders to be carried out over the course of months, in which time the courts debate the legality of the orders. Yet, even once state governors are determined to have broken the law, the damage has already been done, including to the assets and enterprises of the people, and these governors face little to no personal consequence for their illegal orders, with the possible exception of Gretchen Whitmer, who may face impeachment for her defiance of a court order.

Since the beginning of the coronavirus restrictions, U.S. citizens have found out that state governors have the ability to cause substantial damage to their livelihoods, and face little consequence for their misuse of power, which in some cases is illegal.

The United States is widely regarded as a country of rebels. There is a reason for that, which has much to do with the fact that our founding fathers figured something out about government: that what makes a leader is a following, and that no one can govern an individual without the individual’s consent. Our proclamation of religious liberty was a direct challenge to a king who claimed that his position of authority was a matter of divine mandate. Today, the religious people of America are being challenged by a different sort of tyrant, the kind who possesses less power, authority, and consequence than a king. Our indignation towards them is unquestionably appropriate, as many of our state governors are loathsome individuals with no respect for the religions or faiths of the founders.

If you’re among the many Americans who, on this Thanksgiving day, are gathering together with family and friends in defiance of the will of certain debased governors, you are doing so with the true heart of an American. If these so-called governors have the hearts to understand it, maybe they’ll eventually figure it out.

But if someone doesn’t have the capacity to understand why a person would want to gather with family and friends, they’re truly unfit to lead.

Panic-Buying Round 2 is Underway

This photo was taken earlier this year.

Just a few days ago, I warned my readers that they have an opportunity to prepare for a possible new round of lockdowns. It would appear that I’m not the only one with my ear to the ground, as people have started prepping for a next round of lockdowns, which seems to be turning into another bout of panic-buying.

While Biden’s guys are flip-flopping on whether to institute a nationwide lockdown (which federal judges in Michigan and Pennsylvania have already found unconstitutional), Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan, has decided that she just couldn’t wait and decided to institute a three-week lockdown (ignoring those federal judges). Leftists are itching to lock everything down, and they can hardly contain themselves.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has already opposed lockdowns, citing the economic damage that they do, worsening the problems of poverty and child starvation.

Not that left-wing governors care.

With them, it’s about power. And the lockdowns are yet another way they can express their power over you. Want to physically attend college so you can build career connections? Governors have their own aspirations. Want the income you need to buy that house? Governors care about their own income. Have family plans? Governors have their own plans for the future, and they don’t care about you.

While mass-hysteria fueled by corporate-media sensationalism was the main driving factor of early 2020 panic-buying, the panic-buying of late 2020 is being driven by sheer distrust of left-wing governors, at least one of which is ignoring a court ruling and the law of the land just to do as they please, and more chilling still, they’ve been able to avoid accountability for it until now. That may soon change with the possible impeachment of Gretchen Whitmer, but I’m not counting on it.

Just days ago, a handful of Northeast governors have met up in an emergency meeting to conspire against us discuss further coronavirus restrictions in light of an increase in the number of new cases. Among the points discussing involved more limitations on the number of people who can gather together in one place, which just so happens to be something a Pennsylvania federal judge directly ruled against.

Wow, I had no idea that a federal judge could be simply ignored. Life hack!

Michigan Governor Faces Impeachment Over Lockdown

(I would have put an image of Gretchen Whitmer here, but my readership probably doesn’t want to look at her.)

Michigan representative Matt Maddock announced on Twitter that he is one of several Michigan lawmakers that will be pursuing the impeachment of Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer.

The impeachment motions would be coming in light of Gretchen’s announcement of new coronavirus restrictions, which she intends to last three weeks. Earlier this year, a federal judge ruled that Gretchen’s previous coronavirus lockdowns were unconstitutional, similar to another ruling in Pennsylvania.

Not only is Gretchen’s lockdown unconstitutional, it is in direct violation of a court order. What’s more, as Matt explains, she ignored due process and “Weaponized [contact] tracing databases to aid democrat campaigns”.

Of course, it’s also relevant that Gretchen is a dangerous, irresponsible fanatic, for reasons Matt gives in his Twitter post.

Personally, I applaud Michigan lawmakers’ pursuit of the impeachment of Gretchen Whitmer, as I believe that there should be consequences when leadership damages the livelihoods of ordinary citizens in violation of the law of the land. Considering the extent of the damage Gretchen has caused, impeachment is not enough. She needs to be held financially responsible for the damage she caused, as determined by a class-action lawsuit, out of her own pockets.

It would seem as though Gretchen was one of many children who believed that being governor meant that you could do whatever you want, but didn’t at some point learn that the U.S. of A. is a very rule of law kinda place.

Because Gretchen Whitmer thinks it’s okay to ignore the ruling of a federal judge, perhaps Michiganders should ignore her.

TWAT News: Burger King recommending McDonald’s?!

It would seem like the Coronavirus Apocalypse is getting serious, because now Burger King is recommending eating at McDonald’s in an effort to keep the fast food industry going.

If you’re like me, then you’ve been eating at home more lately, or just eating healthier in general, as it’s much less expensive than dining out. Of course, I’ve been downing ramen lately, which isn’t the healthiest thing around, but is inexpensive, and accessible.

It would seem like the fast food industry is feeling the pinch. There aren’t many Burger Kings in my neighborhood, and the one I’ve visited on the way to church has closed down since the onset of the Coronavirus Apocalypse. Not that I’m feeling especially bad for the fast food industry, considering the tricks that they play to keep people addicted, which includes adding sugar to their food, as Subway does with their bread.

As an article from BoredPanda pointed out, not everyone was buying the corporate shilling. As commenters on Twitter duly noted, it’s smaller businesses that more desperately need attention. They have a point, considering that it’s the small businesses that were hit the hardest during the lockdowns, with some of them closing down, never to open again. In fact, during the lockdowns, it was big business that was better off, especially with less competition from smaller business.

People are going to big box stores like Walmart and Target, getting more in fewer stops in an effort to limit travel. People who aren’t leaving their homes are ordering through sites like Amazon. Are these the kinds of businesses that need help?

Yet, people are finding it more difficult to frequent smaller businesses, as many of us have lost our jobs, and others still are squeamish to spend lots of money, considering that more lockdowns might be in the near future, and it’s hard to predict what some state governors might do.

When it comes to food, I’ve taken an interest in shelf-stable items, including canned food, flour, rice, dried beans, and even ramen. I even have some food left from one of those Auguson Farms buckets, which has simple-to-prepare food items that can last on the shelf for years. What I got was mostly cheap, and has the potential to last a little while, which can help in the event that things get challenging. It’s not a bad idea to secure some of these items while they’re still relatively easy to find.

When facing the possibility to fighting for your life, fast food loses much of its appeal. But it wasn’t so much the virus that brought us to this point as it was the response to it.

Burger King recommended McDonald’s. That Was Actually The news.

Fauci: “Do what you’re told” because science

Anthony Fauci, looking more like Hannibal Lecter by the day.

Dr. Anthony Fauci has been a proponent of muzzling Americans with facemasks. Now, it’s apparent that his own facemask is tight to the point of depriving his brain of oxygen, because now he’s literally telling Americans to “do what you’re told”.

Don’t believe me? Here’s what Fauci had to say, provided by NBC New York:

“I was talking with my U.K. colleagues who are saying the U.K. is similar to where we are now, because each of our countries have that independent spirit,” he said on stage. “I can understand that, but now is the time to do what you’re told.”

He actually said that.

He also said that “science” was being politicized, rather than trusted. That’s interesting, because it was “science” that governors trusted when shutting down states, causing unemployment to skyrocket, poverty to soar, and exasperating child starvation, all while not asking Americans themselves whether they objected.

And, what do you know, it turns out that scientists don’t have any idea how to run a society. For that matter, neither do doctors. Why not ask economists? And sociologists? And, for that matter, the people themselves? Even the WHO has come to understand that lockdowns were a bad idea.

Anthony Fauci sounds close to understanding that Americans don’t listen to authoritarians like him. But if he figured that out, he’d promptly shut up, get off the stage, and go where we don’t have to look at him.

If Anthony Fauci does not end up at a bus station somewhere begging for change, he has not experienced the damage he himself has caused.

This is your chance to prepare for another lockdown.

From Witneb.com (not a sponsored post)

You’d better be listening, because after this, I get to say I told you so.

An adviser for Biden stated his intention for a 4 to 6 week nationwide lockdown. He has since walked back on this statement, but we know that these guys are at their most trustworthy when they accidentally say the quiet part out loud.

This is our chance to be prepared for it. Here’s some recommended actions:

  • Stock up on shelf-stable food items,
  • Secure your home, preferably 2A style,
  • Procure various sundry items, it’s difficult to tell what there may be a shortage of,
  • Make sure bills are paid, and some money is saved, if this can be reasonably done.
  • Be prepared to hit the road on a moment’s notice. Consider assembling a bug-out bag.

You might ask, “What if the lockdown doesn’t happen?” Generally, it’s better to have and not need than to need and not have. People should be prepared for disasters, in any case.

But consider this: we’ve already seen lockdowns, and no one asked us whether we thought they were a good idea. What’s more, much of Europe has already enacted a second round of lockdowns, with little notice, leading to rioting in Italy and France.

Some of you might think Trump might help you. His ability to do so might be limited, especially if your state has a Democrat as a governor. Besides, they didn’t try cheating him out of an election because they wanted him to have a chance, and they’re not censoring him and his followers on social media and corporate news outlets because they want him to do anything about it.

The left has previously stated their intention to listen to the advice of the World Health Organization (WHO). Since then, the WHO has voiced their opposition to lockdowns, saying that they should only be used as a last resort. The left isn’t listening, because their own control over us is more important to them than anything doctors have to say about it, and “science” is only useful to them as far as they can use it to their own ends.

You might feel secure because your job was on the arbitrary list compiled by your state governor that he deemed “life-sustaining”. But be warned, Biden’s list may be different from that of your state governor.

The initial lockdowns exasperated the problems of poverty and child starvation. It is advised that you act for your family’s benefit, as the left has proven that they don’t care about you or your children.

There it a lot more to say about how to prep for another lockdown, so it’s suggested that you check out some guides on how to do so, such as this one by Preparedness.news.

This is our opportunity to prepare, and it may slip away from us more quickly than we realize.

You’ve been warned.

Europeans Rioting, Fleeing in Response to New Lockdowns

Going against the advice of the WHO, leaders across Europe are calling for second round of lockdowns in an effort to contain the coronavirus.

The novel coronavirus, also known as SARS-CoV2, causes a disease known as COVID-19. Symptoms include a mild, persistent cough that lasts about two days. The survival rate is almost absolutely guaranteed for most people, but there is a fatality rate of about 6% for the elderly. In most respects, it’s like the flu.

Traffic is backed up for “hundreds of miles” outside Paris, France as people desperately flee the city in an effort to escape more draconian measures of the lockdown, which involves confinement to one’s home, save only by those with paperwork. This measure is to be enforced by police.

A similar lockdown in Spain has provoked similar riots, Germany faces a lockdown for the month of November, and Belgium faces the possibility of another lockdown as early as this weekend.

Previously, the World Health Organization (WHO) has advised against lockdowns, stating the damage that such lockdowns have done to the economy, causing poverty that’s likely to double, and exacerbating the problem of child starvation.

Of course, the leaders of the EU countries threatening their people with lockdowns don’t care about you or your children. To them, the lockdowns are trivial because they are rich and you are not. They are insulated from the consequences of their policies, and care little beyond that. They have the means to eat well for the duration of a lockdown, but did not consider you.

Europeans, stop voting for people who don’t care about you.

Americans, the ball will be in our court in just a few days.

“We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself.” -President Donald Trump

Work-At-Home Falling Out of Favor With Employers

The reasons keep piling up to move on from the Coronavirus Apocalypse. This time, it’s becoming apparent to employers that working from home isn’t such a great long-term idea.

Earlier this year, companies adopted working from home as an approach to keep their employees safe from a virus that causes a mild cough for a few days. Obviously, it wasn’t an option for every employer, as many jobs require a physical presence to get them done, such as those in the service industry, or production jobs.

Initially, it the work-at-home deal seemed great, as well-motivated workers that didn’t need to commute could perform their jobs in spite of the distractions of home. But in time, productivity seemed to decline, and it’s becoming apparent why.

Much of the motivation behind the initial high productivity was fear. People were afraid that they might quickly lose their jobs, and the world was changing in a hurry. However, that fear has largely disappeared, as the world is slowly returning to normal due to a combination of factors (the virus being discovered to be far less deadly than first anticipated, the WHO being against lockdowns, various measures against the virus being found illegal in certain countries, etc.).

Also, the same efficiency that can be achieved with teams on collaborative projects is difficult to replicate when each member of the team is working remotely. According to the Wall Street Journal article, what could take an hour for a team could take all day for a group working remotely.

Another problem that I’ve seen from doing work remotely has to do with school attendance. The Coronavirus Apocalypse is a really bad experience for those attending college, as much of the experience that one would get from lab work cannot be effectively recreated by attending school from home.

One of the reasons one wants to attend a more prestigious school isn’t because the coursework is more challenging, it’s because those schools offer more tools to help students to succeed. Prestigious schools such as MIT and Harvard have huge libraries and laboratories in which professors can hold workshops and students can collaborate on projects. What’s more, it’s at these prestigious schools that students can network with their peers and future employers in job fairs to help build their careers.

Without these valuable tools, the main reason to attend an Ivy League school is just to say you did!

These are some of the unsung tragedies of the lockdowns that were a gross over-reaction to a virus that actually wasn’t very bad. Sadly, any honest assessment of the situation is likely to be buried, while the content more likely to be promoted is drivel along the lines of “THE LOCKDOWNS ARE GREAT, THANK YOU, MORE LOCKDOWNS PLEASE,” or “KILLER CORONAVIRUS OF EVIL DEATH MURDERS PEOPLE“, because for some reason, coronavirus alarmism has become a left-wing viewpoint, to be promoted by Dark State media to the detriment of sense.

Was the WordPress block editor made by staffers working at home?

The World Health Organization is Now Opposing Lockdowns

As the novel coronavirus (SARS CoV-2) spread early in 2020, the prevailing wisdom was “14 days to slow the spread”. We’re now over 200 days into the lockdowns, and there’s no signs that (mostly-left) leaders have any plans for life to return to normal, in spite of the extremely-low fatality rate of a virus that turned out to be mostly harmless.

Now, the World Health Organization (WHO) is advising against shutdowns as a means to control the coronavirus, saying that it was only intended to be considered as a last resort for when things looked especially dire.

The WHO furthermore explained that it does not advise shutdowns due to the widespread economic damage that such shutdowns would cause.

“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” said WHO envoy Dr. David Nabarro. “The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

Nabarro pointed to what’s happening to poverty levels as one of the reasons why the WHO is advising against lockdowns:

“We really do appeal to all world leaders: stop using lockdown as your primary control method,” said Nabarro. “Look what’s happening to poverty levels – it seems that we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition because children are not getting meals at school… This is a terrible ghastly global catastrophe, actually.” (emphasis mine)

Those advocating the lockdowns are obviously not considering the doubling poverty rates or the child starvation that their irresponsible policies are causing. But considering that they have no idea how to run a society, how can you blame them for making such a mistake?

Jane Orient M.D. is one of over 200,000 people, as well as doctors, scientists, and professors, who have signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which has decried the damage done by the coronavirus shutdowns. She is among the many who has pointed to the successes of Sweden in battling the coronavirus, where coronavirus restrictions were minimal, and yet the country has had lower-than-expected coronavirus rates.

Recently, posting anything to social media challenging the WHO’s advice in regards to the coronavirus has been considered grounds on those outlets for censoring the same content, or perhaps even banning the poster. Now that the WHO is adopting a stance that challenges the thinking of these predominantly-left social media outlets, how these outlets respond to this new information remains to be seen.

As I’ve pointed out before, the economy isn’t just some abstract concept that only stockholders and smart people talk about, it’s something that matters to anyone who cares whether a box of pasta costs $1 or $5. Even if you’re one of those morons who believe that wealth should be redistributed while only a few people should actually work, it should make sense to you that a society doesn’t have a reason to eat unless they actually produce something. For something to be produced, businesses have to be allowed to actually conduct business.

If you do not understand this, you are in no position to tell society how to operate.

Empty heads, empty plates.