Profound thoughts by Tom.
Outstanding post.

Prince William-Manassas Family Alliance

Family saying grace before Thanksgiving dinner in Neffsville, Pennsylvania, 1942.
In 1942 our nation was experiencing the darkest days World War II.. In August of that year, ferocious battles had been fought at Stalingrad in Russia and Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands.

This is day before Thanksgiving Day. Whenever we approach a big holiday, I wonder what I should post. Often I give up and don’t bother. Since I can think of nothing new to add, what would be the point? This morning, however, I read these words.

Certain truths should simply be left untouched and honored. Like a good wine, some concepts get better with age. They have stood the test of time. They have been defended by reason. They have been confirmed by revelation. They have been validated by experience. Some ideas have been so vigorously vetted and well stated that they should be left unedited and…

View original post 937 more words

Follow The Science

In the video below a scientist compares Pfizer’s new anti-Covid19-drug and Ivermectin.

In order to replicate, the virus needs to cut long proteins into smaller ones. LIKE IVERMECTIN THE NEW DRUG blocks the cutting of these long proteins, thus preventing the virus from replicating.

HOWEVER, Ivermectin is superior to the new drug because it prevents the spread of the virus in several other ways. It blocks the spike-protein from docking etc.

So, why is Ivermectin still poo-pooed?
We know the answer, don’t we?

Hattip Sharyl Attkisson.

The same scientist also debunks the BBC’s debunking of Ivermectin.
It shows the BBC’s lack of journalistic standards, let alone scientific standards.

Ivermectin is a safe drug that has been used for 40+ years both for humans and animals. The long term effects of ivermectin are known while we know nothing about the long term effects of the “vaccines” which have already killed more than 10,000 people.
It’s hard to believe but there was a time before the wuhan virus and the pre-covid science on Ivermectin was not yet completely politisized.
Here is an excerpt from a scientific paper published in 2011:

“Ivermectin has continually proved to be astonishingly safe for human use. Indeed, it is such a safe drug, with minimal side effects, that it can be administered by non-medical staff and even illiterate individuals in remote rural communities, provided that they have had some very basic, appropriate training. “

Still, there are some idiots who call Ivermectin a horsedewormer.
Newsflash: There are many drugs which are used both in humans and in animals.
Here is a quote from VCA animal hospitals on Aspirin:

“… Aspirin or acetylsalicylic acid (brand names: Ecotrin®, Aspirin®, and others) is an anti-inflammatory, anti-clotting, fever-reducing, and pain control medication, used most commonly for its anti-clotting effects in many pets.

Its use in cats, dogs, and small mammals to treat excessive clotting, inflammation, fever, and pain is ‘off label’ or ‘extra label’. Many drugs are commonly prescribed for off label use in veterinary medicine.”

Should we call Aspirin a dog depainer now?

Hippocrates, Where Are You?

Oh, how I wish this collective psychosis caused by a virus with an infection fatality rate of 0.26% would be gone already.
Today I visited my new doctor for the first time. I left my old doctor because he’s incompetent and negligent.

After the usual questions about my health condition and medication, she asked me if I was vaccinated. I said “No I have done pretty well for two years without the vax.”
She replied: “We’re in a pandemic. Don’t you want to prevent the disease from spreading and infecting other people?”
I was going to reply that the “vax” does not prevent you from spreading the virus and that it is still an experimantal drug but she turned the conversation away to a different topic. That was fine by me. I thought that as long as she isn’t pestering me with the question constantly, it’s ok.

After I got my medication from the pharmacy, I thought that this was a strange reply by my new doctor.
The next logical question should have been: “Have you had already the wuhan virus?”. She didn’t even ask. What’s even more strange is that she didn’t even try to convince me that the “vax” is good for ME. Instead she tried to sell me the “vax” because of its benefit for the collective.
What the hell? A doctor is supposed to care first and foremost for the health and wellbeing of her patients and not for some diffuse collective. This proves again, that the individual must look first and foremost for his own health because if he doesn’t no one else will. No one else has so much interest in the wellbeing of the individual than the individual himself.

Would all the maskholes who want to get me “vaccinated” with an experimental “vax” by hook or by crook care if I was crippled by the “vax”? Hell no, they wouldn’t give a crap and because the “vax” is experimental the “vax” producers have zero liability. So, to all those maskholes I say: “Eff you!”.
All this doesn’t bode well for the relationship with my new doctor but I’m not willing to make a final judgement yet. We shall see.

Karl Marx was no atheist

Mel is a pastor and a blogger who is doing great work in exposing the evils of socialism. I recommend all of his posts but I consider his posts on socialism very helpful for understanding why socialism is evil. Of all his posts in his “socialism series” which he tirelessly and constantly expands I find his latest post to be the best one because it goes straight to the spiritual source of Marxism. He shows that Marx was no atheist. I agree with his conclusion “Karl Marx was a pathetic evil human being in so many ways and his early writings explains the sinister spiritual roots of his evil Socialist ideology.”

My impression of Marx: He hated humanity and he wanted to overthrow the world’s goverments not to replace them with something better but because he wanted to be the ruler instead. Filled with a raging envy he thought he deserved to rule instead of those goverments. As intense as his hatred of the ruling goverments was his hatred of God and I would go so far as to say that he was envious of God and that he believed he should be the object of worship instead which in a sick perverted way has become true for marxists.

In addition to the resources Mel links to I recommend Richard Wurmbrands “Marx and Satan”.
Here is a link to a free online version:

Wurmbrand shows a very dark side of Marx and he makes the case that Marx was a satanist.
Whether Marx was a practising satanist or not, it’s clear which spirit guided and inspired Marx. The death, destruction and oppression that is his legacy is proof of that.

In My Father's House

I wonder if many young people who revere Karl Marx, the father of modern Socialism, know that not only was he not an atheist, he vehemently hated God. I think so-called Christian Socialists should especially understand this, because it’s very clear from Marx’s writings that he not only believed there was a God but wanted revenge on Him in an almost Miltonesque “Paradise Lost” sort of way. This also helps to explain why Marxist ideology is so dark, divisive, and destructive, which is the opposite of Christ’s message: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” (John 10:10 NIV)

View original post 1,001 more words

Crocodile Dumbdee Part 2

In my post “The Spirit Of Freedom Manifested In A Powerful Speech” I shared this great video.

sklyjd, a rabid Australian collectivist, has made the following comment on that post.
My thoughts are as always in brackets and in red color.

sklyjd: This woman talks a load of BS.
[sklyjd just cannot help talking crap. Nothing he says in his comment does refute anything in the video.]

The vaccines have reduced the serious effects and deaths of those who get infected, the hospitals are not overwhelmed due to this fact and people are not suffering long term effects of organ damage that may shorten their lives.
[sklyjd completely misses the point of the lady’s speech.
The point of her speech was that we were told so much that was not true. The “vaccines” do not (as initially advertised) prevent one from being infected and neither do they prevent one from spreading the virus. Our freedoms were not restored (as we were told) when the vaccines were available. To reach herd immunity we were told that 60% has to be vaccinated. The number changed constantly. First to 70%, then 80%, then 98% (like the moron Biden said). To call this shot a vaccine is in itself a lie and the CDC went even so far as to change the definition of vaccine (see here ). We were told a pack of lies.

Ironically, it’s liars like sklyjd who simply can’t resist telling lies as soon as they open their mouths. How do I know he’s lying? It’s impossible for anyone to KNOW the long term effect of the “vaccines” or the virus for that matter. Both have been around no longer than 2 years. The hospitals were never overwhelmed, with or without the vaccine. The number of instensive care beds used in 2020 and in 2021 is in Germany practically the same.]

She will never believe a government will consider her wellbeing.
[Given that we were told so many lies by our goverments (vaccines, lockdowns, masks) it’s perfectly rational not to believe the goverment. It’s foolish to believe someone who repeatedly and constandly lies to you.]

I should expect she would be better off in Russia, North Korea and India maybe, not much chance of freedom there.
[Perhaps, we should add Australia and New Zealand to the list. The difference is shrinking by the day.]

It is interesting when well off privileged middle class people who live in rich countries and have never faced a hardship in their live bleat on about how they cannot get their selfish way when depressed people from Afghanistan and many other similar countries around the globe would beg to change places with her.
[It’s interesting how some idiots think that only privileged middle class people care about their freedom. It’s equally idiotic to assume that people with a working class background like myself would care less about their individual freedom. As for being selfish. I’ve addressed that in my post “Crocodile Dumbdee”.
sklyjd is here the one who’s being selfish, trying to sell his own good as the greater good.
Sure, during Stalin’s genocide by starvation of the Ukrainians some were driven so mad and desperate by hunger that they were trying break INTO the gulag, which shows us how idiotic the argument (but somewehere else it’s much worse) is. It proves nothing. One can always find something worse.]

She is a danger to a free democratic society.
[How so? By exercising her right of free speech which is the basis for ANY democratic society?]

Society understands how to change the government if they are not performing.
[That can only happen if information is not censored and if there is some minimum of transparency.
How would he know how the goverment is performing if there is censorship and no free speech?
Democracy can only function with the very thing he is lamenting.
Technically even Putin’s Russia is a democracy but by controlling the media (if necessary by murdering journalists) and by weaponizing the state apparatus against opposing parties/persons his rule is pretty much guaranteed.]

She is ironically jeopardising her own freedom with unscientific rhetorical rubbish and blanket accusations that divides societies and consequently causes disruption and often violence, look at the US since the Trump conspiracies indoctrinated the minds of the cult like followers, call that freedom?
[Yep, “unscientific rhetorical rubbish and blanket accusations” perfectly describes the horse manure sklyjd is spouting. So far he has provided zero evidence for what he is claiming.
How would she be jeopardising her own freedom?
Since sklyjd didn’t elaborate I have to extrapolate from his prior remarks.
By refusing the “vaccine” she is forcing the goverment to take her freedom away. That’s the typical behaviour of sadists and other abusers. It’s always the victim that made them do it and the victim deserves the punishment. Sick, psychotic nutjob.
Of course, it would never cross the minds of pea brained, collectivist nutjobs that there are solutions which do not require taking away the freedoms of individuals. Without fail those solutions are ignored and only the most extreme measures are preferred. The rest of his comment consists of incoherent nonsense lacking any explanation and unsubstantiated claims lacking any evidence.]

The Spirit Of Freedom Manifested In A Powerful Speech

Christine Anderson, member of the European Parlamant, delivers a speech which is not characterized by churchillian mastery of language but it is short, direct, to the point and most importantly truthful. This, the spirit behind her words and her delivery makes it all the more powerful.
Be inspired by this Lady’s words while the video is still on youtube.

Abortion Is Not About The Right To Choose

Listening to the Dinesh D’Souza podcast where he talks about the racist/eugenic roots of the “pro-choice movement”, I was reminded of a post in the blog “Confessions of a Conservative Atheist” where the author asks “Why is abortion the only right the left doesn’t want to restrict?”

I replied with the following comment:

The Left’s position is consistent.
However, it’s only consistent if you consider what the real goals are.
One openly stated goal is population reduction. No, It’s not some conspiracy theory.
You can find plenty of videos (on TED talk for example) where they openly state that they call for women’s rights (including abortion) in the 3rd world as, among other things, a way to reduce overpopulation and hence, prevent or slow down climate change. That makes sense if one views humanity as a virus and a malignant cancer threatening the planet. I don’t subscribe to that view btw.

The other goal is an unstated one. It’s an attack on the right to life. That is consistent with what you have already said. The Left is practically crapping on all other fundamental rights. Why should the right to life be an exception?

In a dystopian future, which seems not that unrealistic if one thinks of the current global slide into medical fascism (see Australia), I can easily imagine a goverment FORCING women to abort their babies for the purpose of preventing a supposedly imminent climate catastrophy.
Think of China and how they brutally enforced their one-child policy.
No, it’s not that they care for women’s rights. It’s that they attack the last fundamental barrier, THE most fundamental right: the right to life.

As I was listening to the podcast I was thinking that the real goal of abortion has been consistent over time. It’s the extermination of human beings that are deemed undesirable by society or influential groups of people. The motivation and rationalzation changes (racial, overpopulation, envitonmental) but the goal stays the same.

It’s only natural that individual rights (like the right to life) are intolerable for collectivists and so, it’s no surprise that the Left is the advocate for the right to murder babies. Granting mothers the right to violate the right to life of another person (the baby) is very dangerous. Why? Because it’s very difficult to mandate something that is forbidden/illegal. However, it’s much easier to mandate something which is allowed/legal. We have seen how fast something that is allowed (vaccination) becomes mandatory, haven’t we?