Book Review: “Against the Great Reset”

To understand the diabolical nature of the Davos deities, read this book.

This is not the first book to appear in recent times critiquing the Great Reset, Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum, and related matters. Some of these volumes I have already reviewed. But this is the newest and perhaps the best. At nearly 500 pages, the collection of essays found here is first-rate.

The editor has assembled a great lineup of leading intellectual heavyweights, including Douglas Murray, Victor Davis Hanson, Conrad Black, Roger Kimball, Angelo Codevilla, David Goldman and a number of others. All up the book has 16 important essays, plus introductory and concluding pieces by Walsh.

All the key issues are examined here: Covid tyranny, socialism, globalism, economics, politics, China and the social credit system, Big Tech, national sovereignty, the WHO, the WEF, Schwab, Bill Gates, critical theory, green energy, population matters, politicised science, cultural Marxism, climate alarmism, health fascism and so much more.

Against the Great Reset bookIt is good that all the bases are so carefully covered here. Given the rapid pace at which the nefarious agenda items of the Davos elitists are being realised, this book could not be more timely. The plans the activists have for their globalist utopia are not something that lies ahead — all this is already well underway.

Walsh explains early on why such a volume is so very much needed. It will be too late if we wait around for the history books to look back on the Great Reset. The issue NOW is whether “the formerly free world of the Western democracies will succumb to the paternalistic totalitarianism of the oligarchical Resetters.”

False Religion

He is right to speak of how the secular left West is so receptive to all this: “In an age of atheism and disbelief, note the religious fervour of neo- and cultural-Marxism and the messianic quality of Schwab’s anti-humanistic Great Reset.” Quite so. Once you ditch Christianity, plenty of false religions will rush in to take its place.

His closing paragraph nicely informs us of just where we are heading in the Schwabian dystopia:

“The satraps of Davos don’t want to simply reset a post-Covid world. Or a post-fossil fuels world. Or even a post-racial world. They want to run it, forever, and while they no longer have need of a god, they’ll always need an enemy. They may not believe in a power higher than themselves, but they certainly believe in demons, and their most irksome devil is you.”

Others pick up on the quasi-religious nature of all this. As Hanson puts it in his essay, “When ‘great’ is applied to a proposed transnational comprehensive revolution, we should also equate it with near-religious zealotry.” Marxism and radical greenism have both been pseudo-religions, and they come together in the Great Reset.

Absolute Control

He and others of course note how Schwab and Co have capitalised on Covid, and want the whole world under their thumb in order to ‘keep us safe’ from further pandemics, including climate change disasters they assure us are just around the corner.

Many of the writers give us terrific descriptions of who these folks are and what they want. But I especially like how Conrad Black characterises our Davos Divines:

Davos is for democracy, as long as everyone votes for increased public sector authority in pursuit of green egalitarianism and the homogenization of all peoples in a conformist world. …

The Covid-19 pandemic caused Davos Man to break out of his Alpine closet and reveal the secret but suspected plan: the whole world is to become a giant Davos — humorless, style-less, unspontaneous, unrelievedly materialistic, as long as the accumulation and application of capital is directed by the little Alpine gnomes of Davos and their underlings and disciples.

John Tierney carefully looks at how science and medicine were politicised during Covid, and concludes his chapter with this dismal outlook:

The Great Reseters will create jobs for the laptop class and subsidies for crony capitalists while stifling the economic growth that lifts people out of poverty. While promising “environmental justice,” they will burden the poor and the despised middle class with regressive taxes and higher energy costs. Their war on fossil fuels will be devastating to sub-Saharan Africa, where half the homes still lack electricity, but it won’t stop technocrats from flying to Davos for conferences on “climate equity.”

Hmm, did we not pretty much see all of that during the past few years? We will just be getting more of the same. The elites then, as during the past few years, will not feel any ill effects from this. It is us mere peons who will fully face the awful consequences.

Revisionism and Fake Compassion

History of course is under attack here. As Jeremy Black writes:

History’s place at the fore of culture wars is no surprise. The destruction of alternative values, of the sense of continuity, and of anything short of a self-righteous presentist internationalism, is central to the attempt at a “Great Reset”.

Moreover, in a variety of forms, including cultural Marxism and, particularly and very noisily at present, critical race theory, such a “reset” is part of a total assault on the past, one that is explicitly designed to lead the present, and determine the future.

With the assault on history goes an assault on open discussion and free debate. He continues:

“What is possibly most striking is the apparent suspension of any real sense of critique of the new order. Maybe, debate is so beneath you when you possess all truth. Much better just to steamroll people into compliance. Debate is seen as oppressive. Those who hold contrasting views are readily dismissed and shunned…”

Of course, freedom itself is going to be the biggest casualty here. As Walsh says in his concluding piece: “The Great Reset’s gambit is to mask and cloak itself, like an obedient handmaiden, in good intentions while stealing you blind and enslaving you. It positively radiates concern for its billions of fellow men even as it consigns them to indefinite house arrest.”

But on a lighter note, humourist Harry Stein manages to find a ray of hope in all this:

When the Soviets banned typewriters, the good guys produced samizdat by hand and continued on with the business of undermining an empire. We’ve now got podcasts and Substack and the emergence of alternative social-media platforms. We’ve got Dave Chappelle and Ricky Gervais, and The Babylon Bee. The truth is, we couldn’t be more fortunate in our enemy.

Dissident wise guys looking to bring down the Iron Curtain had only the likes of anabolic women weightlifters and a glowering Leonid Brezhnev as material, but in our current war with the elites we’ve got high school “girl” track stars with balls, a non compos mentis Biden, and largely peaceful demonstrators trashing our history and burning down our cities. Tell me that isn’t funny. Better yet, tell it to Klaus Schwab and his band of anti-merry men. We’re already laughing at them, too!

It should be noted that a wide spectrum of views is found here with the authors. Sure, they all oppose Schwab and the Davos madness big time. But other differences exist. Consider religious convictions: we have Christians and non-Christians writing here. Walsh for example prefers talking in terms of ‘Greek and Roman’ instead of ‘Judeo-Christian’. Contrast that with how James Poulos concludes his helpful chapter on Big Tech.

He says our “technoethical elites” are worried about whether they can “wield powers denied them by God. In this fateful moment, our digital politics is revealed to be a spiritual war. To survive victorious, we must remember: the greatest spiritual weapon against errant human reset is divine revelation.”

In sum, the revolutionaries always want to create a new world order, but always end up destroying man and civilisation in the process. Nothing new here. But the Davos elites have no interest in history. We should, however. If we will not learn from history, the prospect looks very bleak indeed. Hopefully, a volume like this will wake up enough people to take a united and forceful stand against this great globalist evil.

___

Originally published at CultureWatch. Photo: Natalie Behring/Wikimedia Commons

Thank the Source

Don’t Trust Me, I’m a Doctor

With the ongoing censorship of health professionals, how can we truly trust their medical advice?

I was recently accused of lying. This was a little hard to swallow, as it was over a directly referenced quote. At the same time, I found the accusation understandable. So much has happened over the past two and a half years, it’s difficult to know who to trust anymore.

Take this example: Pfizer recently admitted they didn’t test for transmission because they were too busy moving at the ‘speed of science’ (to be honest, they really didn’t need to admit it — just ask any double, triple, quadruple-jabbed person whether they’ve had the virus yet). Yet we were repeatedly told by authorities that the vaccine would stop the virus in its tracks. Trustworthy?

Or this example: The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) revealed it did not know the myocarditis risks of the Pfizer and Moderna products until five months after provisionally approving them for use. Five months! Trustworthy?

Meanwhile, adverse event reporting systems around the world indicate more adverse events in Covid vaccines than all previous vaccines developed over the past 50 years, combined. Yet we were subject to months of multimedia messaging that claimed the vaccines were both ‘safe and effective’. Trustworthy?

It turns out that for a small (but significant) number of people, the vaccines are neither safe nor effective.

People like Tyson Illingworth (known to his millions of fans as ‘tyDi’). He is an acclaimed composer, songwriter, and DJ with a swag of awards. Like so many others trying to ‘do the right thing’, he stepped up for his first dose with ‘complete faith and trust in (Australia’s) leadership and medical system’.

What happened next was alarming. He writes,

‘Within days I started to feel severe and unbearable shooting pain and paralysis in my hands and feet.’

Soon afterwards, Tyson was rushed to the hospital.

‘I couldn’t believe the vaccine could do this to me, especially when we were all told it was safe and effective and if there was a reaction it would be minor.’

But there was worse to come. Before his release from the hospital, Tyson was strongly advised to get the second vaccine by the neurologist.

‘I acted on the neurologist’s advice and ended up taking the second vaccine… in hindsight, I cannot believe I listened to her, as I have always thought of myself as a critical thinker, and instead I took advice from a doctor who had no regard for my personal situation.’

Tyson’s symptoms were further exacerbated by the second dose, and he was rushed to the hospital once again.

‘I was unable to move, my hands felt like they were on fire, and I struggled to get through the day… I thought my life was over…’

A couple of months later he contracted the virus, sending him to the hospital yet again.

Tyson’s life has changed immeasurably. Where there should be touring, performing and interviews, instead is terrible pain, medications and doctor’s appointments, and a new understanding of the state of medicine in Australia.

Vaccine Claims and Censorship

The COVID-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme was established to help people receive financial support if they’ve experienced harm because of a Covid vaccine. The application process could be described as complicated, at best. Many patients find they are ineligible to claim due to the limited list of recognised adverse effects. In addition, submitting a claim requires a doctor to complete a 10-page report documenting their medical opinion and link to vaccination — something many doctors are unwilling to put their name to.

Tyson experienced this also:

‘I had 5 different doctors confirm that my condition was caused by the vaccine, and they all said they cannot go on record.’

Thank you, AHPRA position statement

(The position statement makes clear that any health advice which undermines the national immunisation campaign may result in investigation and regulatory action. Result? Many doctors are too scared to report an adverse event for fear they might be investigated.)

Despite these limitations, the claims scheme budget is set to blow out to almost $77 million by July 2023. That’s a lot of claims.

Un-informed Consent

Tyson rightly questions the advice he was given recommending he take the second dose of the vaccine.

‘One would think that when a patient presents with severe neurological issues in hospital a specialist would think first, “I will do no harm and disclose the risk”… The information about neurological side effects was available to every clinician at the time, a simple Google search would have revealed this.’

A formal complaint from Tyson to the Queensland health ombudsman returned a letter acknowledging that although the doctor advised him to get a second vaccine, despite being injured by the first, the practitioner was (conveniently) indemnified.

However, an April 2021 letter from Greg Hunt to both the AMA and the RACGP released under freedom of information outlines the parameters of this ‘indemnity’ and confirms ‘as with all vaccines, informed consent is required before the administration of each vaccine dose’.

The Australian government’s six-page consent form lists only a handful of potential and ‘rare or very rare’ side effects including blood clotting and heart inflammation. There is no mention of neuropathy or potential for other serious side effects emerging or not yet known, due to incomplete safety data of these provisionally approved injectables.

So, what exactly is informed consent?

Every health practitioner should know ‘consent is a process, not a form’, says medical professional insurer Avant.

‘Gaining consent from your patient means more than just going through a checklist of risks… you need to understand the risks that are material to your patient.’

Medical professional insurer MIPS agrees that it is important that professionals ‘identify the risks that the patient is most concerned about.’

Given the nature and severity of Tyson’s reaction to the first dose, it would be reasonable to be concerned about the risk of a reaction to the second.

This ‘un-informed consent’ story is all too common and one I have heard repeated time and again. Being simply handed a form to read and sign does not equate to informed consent. It never has. Especially when administering a provisionally approved medical product.

If the government’s indemnity scheme is dependent on informed consent, and informed consent didn’t happen, what happens when the patient suffers a vaccine injury? Where does the buck stop?

It stops with the patient, the person at the receiving end of this bureaucratic mess. In this case, that person was Tyson, who now suffers debilitating symptoms.

How Bureaucracy Undermines Trust

The recently amended National Law, which regulates medical practitioners, is set to give AHPRA even more power to silence doctors if they are deemed to be undermining ‘public confidence’. This means if doctors disagree with public health messaging, like a ‘safe and effective’ mantra, they risk disciplinary action.

How then will patients be able to trust they are receiving the best health advice for their individual circumstances alongside up-to-date evidence, and not the government-endorsed public health message of the day?

They won’t.

For someone who used to trust our medical system, like Tyson, I’m not sure that trust can be earned back. And with the way things are heading, I wouldn’t trust it either.

___

Originally published at The Spectator Australia. Photo by Chokniti Khongchum.

Thank the Source

Ten Lessons to Learn from COVID-19

As the dust starts to finally settle on COVID-19 — and life begins to get back, at least somewhat, to ‘normal’ — I’ve been reflecting on what has happened over the past couple of years. What are the lessons which we, especially Christians, need to learn from this most recent worldwide pandemic? While there are surely many more, what follows are ten lessons that are particularly pertinent for us as believers.

1. Jesus is Lord, Especially Regarding COVID-19

One of the central truths taught in the book of Revelation is the Lamb of God is even now seated upon the Divine throne (Revelation 5:6-14). No matter what happens throughout the course of human history, it’s all under the sovereign direction and control of Jesus. This is seen especially in Revelation 6 where the seven seals are opened one by one by Christ Himself. Significantly, when the fourth seal is opened, a mysterious rider on a pale horse is released, representing death and Hades respectively.

The apostle John then says, “They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by wild beasts of the earth”. It’s both comforting and sobering to realise that Jesus is ultimately responsible for COVID-19. He released this particular plague upon the earth, and as such, it is fulfilling His holy plan and purpose.

There are many positive lessons we can all learn through suffering (i.e. Romans 5:3-5). But surely the greatest is our need to seek the LORD in humble repentance and faith. For what it’s worth, my anecdotal observation is many churches have seen growth — both spiritually and numerically — during this particular period. And it’s something which we should stop and thank God for doing, while pleading we might be mercifully spared from enduring it again soon.

2. Meeting for Corporate Worship is an Essential Service

One of the most difficult things Christians — especially those living on the eastern seaboard of Australia — experienced during COVID-19, was being forbidden from meeting together in person for corporate worship. At least for a time. In some states, this lasted a couple of weeks, whereas for others it went on for months and months and months! Then when we were allowed to resume our services, we were subject to all kinds of health restrictions; mask mandates, enforced social distancing, temperature checks, QR codes, hand sanitising and even a prohibition against singing.

I recently had the privilege of sitting down (over Zoom) with two researchers from Edith Cowan University in Western Australia, to discuss how churches played a vital role in helping people stay connected during this difficult time. Interestingly, their thesis was those who stayed connected to Christian communities during COVID-19 did better than those who did not. It sounds obvious I know, but many people’s mental health suffered terribly over the past couple of years. And from just a sociological perspective, churches provided an essential way for people to be supported.

What quickly became clear though, is how important it is to physically meet together as God’s people. Celebrating communion, witnessing weddings, grieving through funerals and being able to just greet one another face-to-face (i.e. 3 John 14) are all integral to Christian worship and human flourishing. Unfortunately, some people have failed to fully appreciate this and continue to routinely watch church online from home. Even after the pandemic is all but over. But the privilege to meet together again each Lord’s Day should be cherished with renewed enthusiasm, commitment and thankfulness.

3. Technology is a Good Servant, but a Bad Master

Scott Morrison, the former Prime Minister of Australia, made the comment that during COVID-19, that we took up technology at a rate which would have taken more than ten years in ‘normal’ circumstances. It has been wonderful to be able to have meetings over Zoom and live stream services to those who — because of physical distance or ill health — couldn’t be present.

But that has also come at a great cost. As mentioned above, nothing can replace human contact and interaction. The Lord has created us to be in relationship with Himself as well as each other. I heard a terrific talk recently from a retired Professor of Teaching at the University of Technology, Sydney. And his main point was ‘relationship’ is the key to effective learning. Something integral is lost though, when a screen takes the place of a real, live person.

4. Conscience is Not Our Supreme Standard

The question of mandatory vaccination raised important ethical and theological questions, especially from a Biblical perspective. For those who are interested, I have written about the issue more fully here. One of the key sources on this topic — especially for Australian Presbyterians — is the Declaratory Statement relating to the Westminster Confession:

Civil Magistrate (vi) That with regard to the doctrine of the civil magistrate and his authority and duty in the sphere of religion as taught in the Subordinate Standard, the Church holds that the Lord Jesus Christ is the only King and Head of the Church, “and Head over all things to the Church, which is His body”. It disclaims, accordingly, intolerant or persecuting principles, and does not consider its office-bearers, in subscribing the Confession, as committed to any principle inconsistent with the liberty of conscience and the right of private judgment, declaring, in the words of the Confession, that “God alone is Lord of the conscience”.

While the place of “conscience” is crucial — i.e. Romans 14 — and I personally defended the rights of others at the General Assembly of Australia (GAA) to not be vaccinated, it can also be overplayed. This is because one’s conscience is not infallible. Unlike the Holy Scriptures, an individual’s conscience is not the Supreme Standard in deciding what one should or should not do in every single circumstance.

God’s Word often warns us to not be led astray by controversies that replace the centrality of the Gospel (e.g. 1 Timothy 1:3-7; 6:20-21; 2 Timothy 2:23; Titus 3:9-11). A couple of passages relating to the place of conscience are especially pertinent. For example,

  • Jeremiah 17:9. We can’t trust our own “hearts” which includes our thinking and feelings, because it is “deceitful” and even “beyond cure”.
  • 1 Timothy 4:2. It is possible for our consciences to be “seared” or dulled through false teaching.
  • Titus 1:15. Once again, one’s conscience can become “corrupted”.
  • 1 Corinthians 8:7. Finally, an individual’s conscience can become “weak”.

COVID-19 revealed the importance not only of individual Christian freedom — especially relating to mandatory vaccination — but also the importance of Christian accountability. As Presbyterians, COVID-19 provided a particularly good opportunity for sessions, Presbyteries, State Assemblies and ultimately, the General Assembly of Australia to wrestle with these issues and to provide wisdom and guidance to the broader church.

5. The CCP Cannot Be Trusted

While it was initially dismissed as being something of a conspiracy theory, the “lab leak” explanation relating to COVID-19 has become increasingly accepted. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) strenuously denied any link to the virus at first, but the rest of the world has woken up to their political deceit. For a well-researched and persuasive presentation of this thesis, see Sharri Markson’s What Really Happened in Wuhan (HarperCollins, 2021).

One of the most remarkable people in uncovering the danger which COVID-19 initially posed was that of the Christian medical doctor, Dr Li Wen Liang. Dr Wen Liang himself died of the virus at the age of thirty-four. But his legacy as a whistleblower almost definitely saved countless numbers of lives. While forgotten by most people, Dr Wen Liang’s name should be remembered for his sacrificial service and also personal courage, as the following video shows.

6. The State is Not Our Saviour

Too many Christians viewed the state during COVID-19 as their functional saviour. Daily media briefings with state Premiers became so routine, that many started to become defined by it. People would gather around their phones at around 11 am each morning, urgently waiting for the latest health update on how many people had been infected. Such ‘panic porn’ gave politicians an incredible sense of power and level of social control which truly was unprecedented in Australian history. But the cost was that we looked to the State, and not to God, to ultimately save.

My own observation was there being a noticeable lack of corporate prayer — let alone any call to fasting or repentance — during COVID-19. Instead, we were increasingly tempted to put our trust in the government to deliver us from a virus which was nowhere near as deadly as first predicted.  While those in authority made many good decisions for the benefit of the community, it’s crucial to keep in mind their limitations and to ultimately put our hope in the LORD (Psalm 146:3-5).

7. The State is Not Utterly Wicked

Alternatively, other believers viewed the state as being completely wicked and an instrument of the Devil. Some people I interacted with even saw the vaccine as being a “mark of the beast” (Rev. 13:16-18)! The challenge throughout COVID-19 was — as it has always been — to seek to submit to governing authorities whom the LORD has placed over us, upholding them in prayer and especially showing them honour (See 1 Peter 2:13-17; 1 Timothy 2:1-3; Titus 3:1-2; Romans 13:1-7).

While human rulers are not perfect, they have still been instituted by God Himself. And if the apostles wrote and expected this of believers during a time when someone like Nero was emperor — when Christians were being routinely executed for their faith — how much more applicable are these commands for us today?

8. Schadenfreude is Always Ungodly

One of the things which has been especially difficult to witness has been the level of pride and condescension levelled at fellow believers with differing opinions. ‘Schadenfreude’ is defined as being the “pleasure derived by someone from another person’s misfortune”. Sadly, this has been present in people on both sides of the debate. Whether it was a non-vaccinated person being excluded from employment, education or social settings because of their refusal to “take the jab”, or alternatively, the sense of vindication non-vaccinated people felt as their principled opposition was shown to be more and more reasonable. Delighting in someone else’s misfortune has been an all-too-common feature in social media feeds and it is not only ugly, but also ungodly.

9. Fear was Present on Both Sides

I have friends who hold to extreme views on both sides of the COVID-19 debate. There were some who were vax hesitant and highly sceptical of everything the government did, whereas I know others who not only believed vaccination should be mandatory for everyone but that the Australian government didn’t go far enough. Ironically, both sides gave in to a spirit of fear.

For those who insisted on mandatory vaccination, there was an excessive fear of sickness and death. Which was strange when, especially in comparison to other pandemics, much fewer people died than on previous occasions. But those who were anti-vax started to go down the conspiracy “rabbit hole” of seeing the whole world on the verge of imminent collapse. Everything started to take on apocalyptic proportions and pose an existential threat to Western civilisation.

While I believe, there are legitimate concerns from those on both sides, we must never give in to fear (2 Timothy 1:7). Instead, we should continue to trust and worship Jesus as being the One who is in complete control. If that means we are going to suffer in some form or another, then the best way to be prepared is through a clearer vision of both who He is and what He has done.

10. There was a Greater Danger than COVID-19

By far the saddest thing which I have witnessed over the past couple of years was how many believers valued their own personal opinions over unity in the Body of Christ. Whether it was pressuring people to be vaccinated or alternatively, refusing to comply with any of the government health decision, the greatest danger of all was division.

I’m sure Satan has used this period as an opportunity to fracture more than a few fellowships, and even entire churches. It’s good to be reminded then, of Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17. And in particular, that we would be one just as He and the Father are one. Why? “To let the world know that You sent Me and have loved them even as you have loved Me.” (John 17:23)

There is a powerful and profound witness which our unity as Christians has. It is not only a wonderful blessing and encouragement to us personally (i.e. Psalm 133), but it also presents the truth of the Gospel to the unbelieving world in a real and tangible way. Because our unity with each other as believers is an outworking of the unity which we have first been given through the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus.

There is Nothing New Under the Sun…

The writer of Ecclesiastes famously wrote, “there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Everything that is has been before. And what has been will happen again. What’s more, it’s worth remembering that believers in the past have had to endure similar trials and hardships which we are currently experiencing today. And there is much from church history which we can continue to learn. [1]

But as we have all seen, there is much which the Lord God Almighty has been teaching us through this latest particular trial. The only question is, will we humble ourselves to learn from what has happened, or will we in our pride think that we know better than everyone else?

___

[1] For an excellent overview of the topic, see Peter Barnes, “Plagues throughout History and Some Christian Responses”, Reformed Theological Review, Vol. 79, No. 2 (2020).

Photo by Shvets Production.

Thank the Source

Covid Rules and the Science Behind Them

Today I’m bringing you the very best of Covid Rules and explaining the complicated science behind them.

We were treated like idiots for two years. We must never, ever forget.

Covid dining rule

The Rule:

We had to wear masks when entering a restaurant and walking to the table, but were allowed to remove the mask when seated at the table. Mask had to be reapplied in order to leave.

The Science:

Covid doesn’t spread when you’re eating and drinking.

George Floyd riots covid rule

The Rule:

No one was allowed out in public except to riot over the death of George Floyd.

The Science:

A pandemic of racism (yes that’s actually what some media called it) was more deadly than an actual pandemic.

The Rule:

Curfews.

The Science:

Covid can tell time.

The Rule:

In Ohio, the sport of wrestling was permitted ,but competitors were not allowed to shake hands at the end of the bout.

The Science:

Covid hated good sports.

Covid lockdown rule sunset

The Rule:

Melbourne residents were told it was “not in the spirit of the lockdown” to watch the sunset.

The Science:

Covid kept a list of people who glanced at the setting sun and eventually infected them.

The Rule:

People walking alone on secluded beaches were arrested.

The Science:

An infected walker could infect grains of sand, or possibly even fish.

The Rule:

Go safe, go “glory hole”. Also, don’t rape people.

The Science:

Covid will not attempt to infect sexual deviants.

Covid rule - grass circles

The Rule:

When sitting in a park, you and your friends were required to sit within circles painted on the grass.

The Science:

Covid agreed not to penetrate inside the painted circles, but anyone outside the circles was fair game.

The Rule:

In France, people had to fill out a form authorising themselves to go outside for a walk. In the absence of a form, people could write a letter and sign it, or else give themselves permission via an app. If you left the house without giving yourself written permission to do so, you had to pay a fine.

The Science:

Covid would not spread if you had a note saying you were taking the pandemic seriously.

Covid elevator rule

The Rule:

Do not speak in the elevator.

The Science:

Covid respects silence.

Covid AFL goalposts

The Rule:

AFL goalposts needed to be disinfected by men in hazmat suits.

The Science:

Researchers calculated that it was technically possible for an infected player to touch the ball which, when kicked, might hit the post, transferring Covid from player to ball to post. A player who subsequently touched the post and then inadvertently put his finger near his mouth could get Covid, maybe.

The Rule:

Supermarket workers were required to operate behind a perspex safety screen even though they were touching all the grocery items you had just touched before returning them to you for transportation home whereupon you would touch them again.

The Science:

Covid got confused by the perspex screen and forgot it could transmit itself via people’s hands.

The Rule:

In the UK, you were not allowed to drink an alcoholic beverage onsite unless you also ate something.

The Science:

Opening your mouth to pour liquid into would attract Covid, but opening your mouth to shove food down would not.

___

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.

Thank the Source

Covid Rules and the Science Behind Them

Today I’m bringing you the very best of Covid Rules and explaining the complicated science behind them.

We were treated like idiots for two years. We must never, ever forget.

Covid dining rule

The Rule:

We had to wear masks when entering a restaurant and walking to the table, but were allowed to remove the mask when seated at the table. Mask had to be reapplied in order to leave.

The Science:

Covid doesn’t spread when you’re eating and drinking.

George Floyd riots covid rule

The Rule:

No one was allowed out in public except to riot over the death of George Floyd.

The Science:

A pandemic of racism (yes that’s actually what some media called it) was more deadly than an actual pandemic.

The Rule:

Curfews.

The Science:

Covid can tell time.

The Rule:

In Ohio, the sport of wrestling was permitted ,but competitors were not allowed to shake hands at the end of the bout.

The Science:

Covid hated good sports.

Covid lockdown rule sunset

The Rule:

Melbourne residents were told it was “not in the spirit of the lockdown” to watch the sunset.

The Science:

Covid kept a list of people who glanced at the setting sun and eventually infected them.

The Rule:

People walking alone on secluded beaches were arrested.

The Science:

An infected walker could infect grains of sand, or possibly even fish.

The Rule:

Go safe, go “glory hole”. Also, don’t rape people.

The Science:

Covid will not attempt to infect sexual deviants.

Covid rule - grass circles

The Rule:

When sitting in a park, you and your friends were required to sit within circles painted on the grass.

The Science:

Covid agreed not to penetrate inside the painted circles, but anyone outside the circles was fair game.

The Rule:

In France, people had to fill out a form authorising themselves to go outside for a walk. In the absence of a form, people could write a letter and sign it, or else give themselves permission via an app. If you left the house without giving yourself written permission to do so, you had to pay a fine.

The Science:

Covid would not spread if you had a note saying you were taking the pandemic seriously.

Covid elevator rule

The Rule:

Do not speak in the elevator.

The Science:

Covid respects silence.

Covid AFL goalposts

The Rule:

AFL goalposts needed to be disinfected by men in hazmat suits.

The Science:

Researchers calculated that it was technically possible for an infected player to touch the ball which, when kicked, might hit the post, transferring Covid from player to ball to post. A player who subsequently touched the post and then inadvertently put his finger near his mouth could get Covid, maybe.

The Rule:

Supermarket workers were required to operate behind a perspex safety screen even though they were touching all the grocery items you had just touched before returning them to you for transportation home whereupon you would touch them again.

The Science:

Covid got confused by the perspex screen and forgot it could transmit itself via people’s hands.

The Rule:

In the UK, you were not allowed to drink an alcoholic beverage onsite unless you also ate something.

The Science:

Opening your mouth to pour liquid into would attract Covid, but opening your mouth to shove food down would not.

___

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.

Thank the Source

Blindness – Religious and Ideological

Blindness – Religious and Ideological

Some will ignore the evidence even when it stares them in the face.

When folks are captivated by particular ideologies and belief systems, and are held captive to particular narratives, they can have reality and facts staring them in the face, but they will still ignore or deny them. We see this happening all the time. Some folks are so consumed by their false beliefs that they will look you straight in the face and tell you black is white or right is wrong.

As I was again reading through John 9 today, I was struck by this. It is not just a case of spiritual blindness but hardness of heart, and a refusal to believe in what is true and plain as day. You would be aware of the subject of this 41-verse chapter: it is all about the man born blind, the healing of him by Jesus, and the negative response of the Jewish religious leaders and Pharisees.

Refusing to See

While the healed man and his family were rejoicing, the unbelieving Jewish leaders just got even more bent out of shape, and hated Jesus even more. Consider what we read in verses 18-23:

The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight and asked them, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?”

His parents answered, “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.”

(His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.) Therefore his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”

Wow, imagine being so consumed by hatred and moral blindness that something as wonderful as a man healed of physical blindness is treated like dirt, mocked and disbelieved. Such were the people back then in their hatred and rejection of Jesus. No matter what good and wonderful things He did, these leaders just refused to believe and they just hardened their hearts even further.

Guilty

Because of this, Jesus allows them to stay hardened. Indeed, their sin becomes their punishment, as we read in verses 35-41:

Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” He answered, “And who is He, sir, that I may believe in Him?”

Jesus said to him, “You have seen Him, and it is He who is speaking to you.” He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped Him. Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.”

Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, “Are we also blind?” Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, ‘We see,’ your guilt remains.”

I could not but help think of recent parallels to all this. There will always be ideologues and those with a political or social narrative to push who will refuse to change their beliefs even when cold hard facts stare them in the face. They will cling to their preconceived ideas no matter how much countervailing evidence is presented to them.

Ignoring Reality

As a major example of this, it seems every new day we are learning more about the massive con played on us over the past few years, and how just about everything our leaders and “experts” insisted upon has proven to be false or way out of line.

Whether we are talking about never-ending lockdowns, mask effectiveness, jab mandates, hiding away in your home and the like, it seems most of what we were told is now seen as so much baloney. Yet the true believers and the corona cultists refuse to change, refuse to admit they were wrong, and refuse to apologise.

Instead, they just dig in their heels even further, with eyes firmly closed, refusing to deal with the facts, the data, and the evidence. They are wilfully blind. They are captive to their ideology and to their preferred narrative. They will not let truth and reality get in their way.

Of course, this is true in so many other areas as well. The trans cultists are just the same, as I have discussed so often now. They are so blinded by their ideology that they fully refuse to deal with truth, with reality, with biology, with logic, or with common sense. Their political and cultural narrative must crush all that stands in their way.

Humility Required

What R. C. Sproul said in a different context applies here as well: “You don’t have to give up your intellect to trust the Bible. You have to give up your pride.” Just as an atheist finds it quite hard to admit he was wrong when the truth of the Gospel is clearly presented to him, the same with the covid cultists and others like them.

There is plenty of truth out there for those who want to follow the evidence wherever it leads. But often pride gets in the way. To have to eat humble pie and actually admit they were wrong — very wrong — for all this time is just too much for some of these folks.

Others have allowed themselves to become so blinded and hardened that they really are beyond trying to reason with. Their minds are made up and they will reject anyone who dares to differ with them. I have known far too many folks like this, and all you can really do is treat them like the deceived trolls that they are. Sure, we can and should pray for them, but they seem to be beyond having sensible discussions.

Getting back to the Bible and John 9, Scripture elsewhere speaks to this reality of how people are blinded and unable and unwilling to follow truth. As Paul put it in Ephesians 4:18: “They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.

At the very least, we can keep praying for them, and hope that some will be delivered from their blindness and hardness of heart. But sadly, many will not. That is the sort of climate we live in today. It cuts across all areas, be it the spiritual, the political, the cultural or the intellectual.

Theological afterword

On a somewhat different note, it is interesting to compare the opening verses of John chapter 9 with those of chapter 11:

  • John 9:1-3 ~ As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him.
  • John 11:1-4 ~ Now a certain man was ill, Lazarus of Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha. It was Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was ill. So the sisters sent to him, saying, “Lord, he whom you love is ill.” But when Jesus heard it he said, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.”

God was glorified in both cases, even though one involved a physical illness or condition, and the other involved death. In contradistinction to the health and wealth gospellers, there can be a place for illness, sickness and the like. It is not all just the result of a lack of faith, or sin in our life, as these folks claim.

Sometimes God allows illness and suffering to bring great glory for Himself. And that can take the form of a healing, a resurrection, or sometimes even continuing in your infirmity, while still giving God the glory. See more on this here.

___

Originally published at CultureWatch.

Thank the Source

Should Christians Continue Supporting Ukraine?

If Ukraine is unwilling to engage in talks with Russia that can de-escalate the war, allies cannot support this path of destruction.

I was born in Soviet-occupied Budapest.

But I grew up in the West, where older Hungarian migrants told me about the atrocities carried out by Russian forces on my home turf — whether the brutal crushing of the Hungarian Uprising in 1956 or the far-reaching oppression of the Soviet-backed Communist government.

And so, I have a deep-seated, visceral reaction to Russian military aggression.

Few things have angered me more this year than the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and few things warm my Hungarian heart than hearing about Russian military defeats on the battlefield. It’s been inspiring to watch Ukraine holding its own against the third-largest military in the world. All this, of course, with intense NATO and Western help (including from Australia).

More importantly, as a Christian, I believe Western nations should help Ukraine defend itself.

And yet.

I’ve come across information that’s giving me pause about how we support Ukraine. Yes, let’s keep supporting Ukraine, but it should come with strings attached.

Here’s why:

1) The aim of war-fighting should be a ‘just’ peace rather than unnecessary escalation, especially when nuclear weapons are involved

There are legitimate reasons from a Biblical perspective for a nation to wage war.

But the aim of war-fighting should be limited to upholding or restoring justice: never fighting for fighting’s sake.

This is because war is so destructive: it involves the shedding of the blood of combatants and often non-combatants. Thus, a just use of force will always shy away from unnecessary fighting. And this includes unnecessarily escalating the war. [1]

Especially when the war threatens to go nuclear.

 2) Zelensky has potentially closed off an avenue to peace by saying he would never negotiate with Putin. And that makes peace less likely, and escalation (even nuclear escalation) more likely.

And this is where it gets tricky in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.

While Russia (i.e. Putin) has been the aggressor, both sides in the conflict (as in any conflict) have a responsibility to wage war justly. And this includes refraining from unnecessary escalation. Of course, Putin is escalating the war with his call-up of reservists – and even threatening nuclear retaliation[2]

But Zelensky has done and said things recently that could lead to unnecessary and potentially dangerous escalation.

While it hasn’t been widely reported in our mainstream media, Zelensky has recently signed a law that rules out peace talks with Putin:

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky seemingly shut the door on the prospect of having any peace talks with Vladimir Putin — but not with Russia under a different leadership.

Zelensky signed a decree on Tuesday formally declaring negotiations with the Kremlin autocrat to be “impossible.” … we are ready for a dialogue with Russia, but with another president of Russia,” Zelensky said on Friday.

You don’t need a PhD in International Relations to see why this is concerning:

If he’s closed to negotiations with Putin, he’s shut off the main avenue to a negotiated peace.

Secondly, according to US Intelligence, Ukraine authorised the assassination of the daughter of one of Putin’s close allies — on Russian soil:

US intelligence believes a bomb attack that killed a Russian commentator and journalist outside Moscow in August was authorised by Ukrainian government officials… the US had no prior knowledge, provided no intelligence or other assistance, would have opposed it and “admonished” Ukrainian officials about it afterwards.

In other words, Ukraine has unnecessarily taken an action that risks escalating the war.

So how might we respond as Christians?

I believe we should be helping Ukraine defend itself.

But it should be conditional support based on fighting war justly, without unnecessary escalation. And keeping the door to peace — in this case, a negotiated peace — wide open.  We should be careful about promising Ukraine blank cheque ‘for as long as it takes’ type support to defeat Russia, as President Joe Biden has said.

Instead, Christian citizens of Western Nations should encourage our governments to give Ukraine conditional support to defend itself and secure a just peace rather than provoke any unnecessary escalation.

Especially when escalation could be catastrophic not just for Ukraine, but potentially the whole world.

Thank the Source

No Amnesty for Pandemic Pandemonium

A more honest headline for The Atlantic’s recent demand for amnesty over the pandemic response would have been: “Sorry, Not Sorry.”

The sarcasm best represents the article’s smug sentiment.

Author and economics professor Emily Oster inferred that we should just sweep the rubber bullets, totalitarianism, job or jab mandates, medical apartheid, militarisation of the police, mass psychosis and government overreach under the carpet.

Excuses, Excuses

Defending “pandemic choices,” Oster wrote, “In the face of so much uncertainty, getting something right had a hefty element of luck. And, similarly, getting something wrong wasn’t a moral failing.”

Implying that there is no need to hold the commissars of COVID accountable, she added, “Treating pandemic choices as a scorecard on which some people racked up more points than others are preventing us from moving forward.”

Still backing the so-called “vaccines”, Oster preached hard against misinformation.

She then landed her article in the dismissive “both sides were just as bad as each other, so we should just move on” zone.

Notably, Oster blamed the pandemic, and not the pandemic response for “creating many problems that we still need to solve.”

An important distinction, though clearly not one important enough for The Atlantic to make.

Unjust

The (now viral) Oster piece is a slap in the face for many people, who, like my father-in-law, lost his job to a “gross misconduct” charge.

He was fired after years of dedicated service simply because he refused to play along with daddy government’s unjustified medical mandates.

Oster’s words are also of little comfort to my daughter who, in her first year in the workforce, experienced fat cats in the bloated bureaucratic caste forcing her to choose between medical coercion, and losing three months of income.

Worse, Oster’s exaltation of the secular gospel of niceness and nuance blurs black-and-white issues.

With an unsympathetic jackboot, she kicks the concepts of boundaries and accountability to the curb.

Discounting “vax or the axe” victims, the vile, militant embrace of segregation, discrimination, denouncements, and “papers please” domestic passports, she fails to provide any reasonable ground for moving forward.

Nowhere in her demand for forgiveness does Oster demand an end to “vaccine” mandates, or the reinstatement of workers who had been wrongfully dismissed.

Oster would have hit a better tone if she acknowledged that for many victims, solutions start where restitution begins.

Give the unvaccinated their jobs back!

Then include compensation for all the unnecessary suffering, and time unjustly spent in COVID Communism’s version of a Soviet gulag.

Chiming In

Unsurprisingly, co-Atlantic contributor and COVID policy apologist David A. French gave Oster’s article five stars, writing on Twitter:

“This is an excellent piece from someone who was, in fact, quite right about many aspects of COVID policy (including opening schools, for example). Critics are forgetting the focus of this piece is that period when we knew so little. There *should* be grace.”

He, like Sky News commentator Chris Smith, and others who failed the fourth estate by band-wagoning the abuse of power, have a lot to hide from, and a lot they want hidden.

At the height of COVID, French — a favourite among “vax or the axe” segregate-so-we-can-congregate cult — wrote an extensive op-ed, damning dissenters as extremists.

Writing for The Dispatch in August 2021, French appallingly declared,

“The remaining vaccine holdouts are growing more extreme, and significant parts of the Christian Right are enabling, excusing, and validating Evangelical behaviour that is gravely wrong and dangerous to the lives and health of their fellow citizens.”

Weaponizing the oft-misused term “anti-vaxxer”, French then proclaimed that the assertion of civil liberties, such as religious freedom and informed consent, was ‘extreme and dangerous.’

He then charged headlong into the heresy of natural theology, stating that refusing the “vaccine” was the equivalent of refusing Christ: “A sincere desire not to take a shot does not equate with a sincere expression of orthodox Christian faith.”

Grotesquely, like many in his camp, French has gone from: “You’re not a Christian if you refuse the vax,” to “you’re not a Christian if you don’t forgive us for pushing the vax.

Now, in lieu of an apology, and repentance, David French is demanding “vax” victims, and dissenters — that he and others defamed — show “grace.”

Overkill

Calling French out, The Daily Wire’s Megan Basham was right to post screenshots in a Twitter thread with this retort:

Right again was Caldron Pool contributor and cancelled medical professional Dr Jereth Kok, who argued that ignorance is no excuse for abuse:

“By July 2020, the main facts were known. The severity of the virus was known and the harm of lockdowns was known. The “ignorance” excuse applies only to the first 6 months of 2020. Everything after that was not done in a state of ignorance.”

Jereth added,

“You don’t do crazy, destructive things in ignorance. It’s like- “there might be a dangerous terrorist hiding in that village, but we’re not totally sure. Let’s nuke the village to be safe.” The inability of vaccines to stop spread was known in July 2021. The serious adverse effects of the vaccines were known by June 2021. Yet all the mandates took effect in October 2021 onwards.”

If French and those like him are right with God, they’d repent, and seek forgiveness, not demand happy ignorance.

Accountability

If French is indeed as theologically literate as his work suggests, surely he understands the great value in the healthy Christian Anselm’s axiom: ‘Fides Quaerens Intellectum’ — faith seeks understanding. A 1,000-year-old praxis reflecting the Holy Spirit’s gift of discernment spoken of in 1 Corinthians 12, and 2 Corinthians 10:4-5. Not to mention 1 Corinthians 2:15, ‘The spiritual man tests all things.’

See also John 16:13 and John 7. Particularly John 7:18-24’s: ‘Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgement.’

Despite the smug shifting of the onus of responsibility by The Atlantic, French, and those who served at the pleasure of Big Pharma’s golden goose, there can be no amnesty without accountability.

No doubt Oster, French, Smith, and The Atlantic — all members of the fourth estate — agree that democracy dies in darkness.

Being forgiven is not a tool to keep sin hidden.

Being forgiven requires acknowledging there is fault.

Additionally, while most things can, and should be forgiven, there are some things that must not be forgotten.

As a family member, and nurse by profession, said to me the other day, “The woke herd all seem unable to discern between good policy and policy that makes them feel good.”

This sums up the masses, and their willingness to go along with arbitrary government tactics, happy to stay ignorant about both short, and long-term consequences of COVID overreach.

Lessons have to be learned. Good government must bring that which has been hidden into the light.

There can be no free pass for pandemic fanaticism.

Give bad government no quarter, or this insidious inch will turn into a murderous mile.

___

Originally published at Caldron Pool.

Thank the Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)