Covid Stories Roundup – Concentration Camps, Racism, Corruption, Firings, Lying, Hurting People and The Vaccine Companies Admitting Their Product Doesn’t Work

Someone Needs to File a Lawsuit Against Vaccine Mandates for Their Blatant Racism – Hurting Blacks

Creating detention camps in NY and Washington

Get a Shot or Get Fired: A Slew of Companies Issue Vaccine Mandates -The Military, Disney, CVS, Teachers and Health Care Workers

YouTube is banning prominent anti-vaccine activists and blocking all anti-vaccine content – Evil Company Google doing evil. Instead of people actually being able to get help, they are blocking access to the actual cure. Big Tech is in bed with Big Pharma and the Government

NY Hospital Will Stop Delivering Babies as Maternity Workers Resign Over Vaccine Mandate – Hurting pregnant women because it doesn’t fit the narrative. That healthcare workers don’t want the jab is telling, and not in a good way.

Crazy Fauci Moves the Goalposts Again — “Fully Vaccinated” Now Means 2 Shots Plus One Booster – forcing more poison into the veins of healthy people. When will it stop? How many boosters…..

United Airlines Prepares to Fire 600 Employees for Refusing Covid-19 Jab – ruining the lives of more people willing to work but not willing to die

“WE ARE STANDING AT THE VERY GATES OF HELL”: Final warning to humanity from former Pfizer VP, Mike Yeadon – Yes, this is the guy who invented the mRNA jab telling us not to take it

Federal Govt Whistleblower Goes Public with Secret Recordings: ‘Government Doesn’t Want to Show the [COVID] Vaccine is Full of Sh*t’; ‘Shove’ Adverse Effect Reporting ‘Under the Mat’

Johnson & Johnson exec warns against company’s vaccine

“Inconvenience [the unvaccinated] to the point where it’s like, ‘I might as well just f—— do it [and take the COVID vaccine],’ you know what I’m saying? Like ‘I can’t go out of state,’ I can’t – ‘my grandma’s in Canada and I can’t visit her,’ you know what I’m saying? You can’t go to France unless you’re vaccinated — you know you’ve just got to keep doing things like that where you’re almost like a second-grade citizen if you’re not vaccinated, but I know that’s awful.”

Durrant made clear those unvaccinated are “Like a second-grade citizen, like you can’t do anything that a normal citizen can do.”

He continued, “Only way people really act and comply is if it affects their pockets… the link for more

Here’s why the vaccine is not working -This has incredible detail on the subject, a good read

There are huge problems with the vaccine program as currently promoted.

  • First, instead of being low risk, it’s the highest risk that could possibly be engineered, since it’s based on giving you the active disease causing agent.
  • Second, it cannot prevent you from getting infected and passing the disease on to someone else.
  • Third, the use of the vaccine is literally causing variants that vaccine immunity is less effective against to emerge.
  • Fourth, the booster regimen is targeted against a Spike protein that isn’t around much anymore. And it predisposes to something bad called Antibody Dependent Enhancement that we’ll have to discuss another time.

These Charts Say It All: The Depopulation Agenda Is In Full Swing As More And More Americans Are Being Killed And Injured By ‘The Vax’ Being Heavily Pushed By The Genocidal Eugenicists

NFL, Doubling Down On Stupid

They sang 2 songs last Sunday, posing as National Anthems I read (because I didn’t watch). The Star Spangled Banner and Lift up your voice and sing (I think that is the name).

The ratings are down, they are bleeding fans because of Covid and being Woke. Did they not look at the Olympics ratings and why people didn’t watch?

I have always worked with the famous, the rich and the empowered, something I’m not proud of, but it came with the territory of my career. They were always tedious, demanding and self-entitled. I was always glad to be done with them when the job was over. Their entourage’s were even worse, with no real reason other than they thought they were meaningful because of who they worked for.

The rabid fans will stay I suppose, except those with a mind and a conscience. The rest will get fed up and bail.

I have been a season ticket holder to a team that has won multiple Super Bowls and has many players in Canton. I can’t take the kneeling and the other crap that is dividing our country and has nothing to do with sports.

These are the best paid in the country for playing a kids game, yet they feel entitled to tell us what to do and how to think. It’s the same for hollywood and the celebtards. They need to realize that watching sports is for fun and to get away from all the political crap. Instead, they choose to cut their throats even further.

Those with a brain are finding something else to do.

They are being stupid and should just play the game.

Charles Barkley Finally Explains How Politicians Manipulate Racism

“Man, I think most white people and black people are great people,” Barkley said. “I really believe that in my heart, but I think our system is set up where our politicians, whether they’re Republicans or Democrats, are designed to make us not like each other so they can keep their grasp of money and power.”  “They divide and conquer. I truly believe in my heart most white people and black people are awesome people, but we’re so stupid following our politicians, whether they’re Republicans or Democrats, and their only job is, ‘Hey, let’s make these people not like each other. We don’t live in their neighborhoods, we all got money, let’s make the whites and blacks not like each other, let’s make rich people and poor people not like each other, let’s scramble the middle class. I truly believe that in my heart,” he said.

Charles Barkley speaking the truth— ET (@runBMC57) April 3, 2021

How Racism and White Supremacy Are The New Godwin’s Law

Authors Note: I have a tendency to notice patterns in both a macro and micro universes. I’ve been watching this one brew for a while now.


Reformulated in the Net.Legends FAQs “Usenet Rule #4”:

“Any off-topic mention of Hitler or Nazis will cause the thread it is mentioned in to come to an irrelevant and off-topic end very soon; every thread on Usenet has a constantly-increasing probability to contain such a mention.”

It is generally accepted that whoever is the first to play the “Hitler card” has lost the argument as well as any trace of respect, as having to resort to comparing your adversary to the most infamous mass-murdering dictator in history generally means you’ve run out of better arguments. Thus, once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin’s law.

Disclaimer: This blog post does not take a position on racism, it’s prevalence, who is or isn’t or might be racist and my position on this subject. Aristotle noted that the mark of an educated mind is to entertain a thought without accepting it.  Therefore I am observing a speech and behavioral pattern of the public.  In other words it’s on them, not me.

It is also noted that a trait of people with a higher IQ is that you can argue from multiple perspectives (unfortunately so can lawyers and politicians who may or may not be of higher intelligence – especially politicians and especially millennial politicians).

The original Godwin’s Law has lost its’ sting since everyone is now Hitler, so the new talking point is racism or white supremacy. Rather than argue on the merits of the position of the person (political candidates mostly since they dominate the news) the go to is now calling the other person one of these two pejorative names.  This constant overuse has devalued the meaning of the words and rendered them ineffective at worst and boring at best.

Here is a quick search that shows views from multiple points doing just this:…2240.2240..3652…0.0..0.186.324.0j2……0….2j1..gws-wiz.aEnMfNpKcHc&ved=0ahUKEwja48Tux_3jAhXqQ98KHb2CDh8Q4dUDCAc&uact=5

This is in direct conflict with Martin Luther King’s evocative phrase: “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”  Now, it is common to hear you are a racist or white supremacist because you don’t agree with me.  It greatly devalues MLK’s position.

A General Definition of racism

1a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, racial prejudice or discrimination.

While I could list any or all of the comments that have been made in public themselves could be racist in tone, one could make the case for or against whether the accused are really racist. Calling someone a racist is easy but proving most of these ad hominem attacks is harder.

One would need to know what is inside the person making the statements to know if it were really true or just talking points. I won’t and am not even sure if I can make that value judgement. These attacks are easy enough to find (see the media below).

This is not the point of this post. I am not here to call someone a racist or White supremacist (or Hitler), rather to point out a trend.

In the department of redundancy department, this discussion is that the replacement for Godwin’s Law is that you are not Hitler, instead you are racist for whatever reason or whatever you say.

Why is this the case? The overuse of Godwin’s Law has made it impotent in political circles, the media and on social media platforms. Hitler stands with few others in history, perhaps Mao, Stalin or Pol Pot as true villains. Nobody really believes that the other person is like Hitler, they are just trying to make the worst case as they flush their argument down the toilet due to lack of substance.


What most of the accusers are doing is described in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals numbers 7-13 as follows:

  • “Keep the pressure on.”
  • “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
  • “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
  • “If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.”
  • “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

Rather than argue on a platform, beliefs and issues, it is far easier to make your opponent defend themselves, and put them off their talking points.

Example: Candidate 1) If elected, I’ll lower taxes if elected (insert any issue here because it’s about to be destroyed).

Candidate 2) my opponent is Hitler and molests collies.

Press coverage: Candidate 1 is a well known collie molester. How long has this person been molesting Collies? The first question in the next debate; Candidate 1, are you still molesting Collies?

Now insert the word racist or white supremacist for molesting collies and you get the point of why this is effective.

  • “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”


A common adage is that sex sells, as do murders, rapes, political embarrassments and anything not good news. Guess what they will print (hint: collie molester)?

A not so recent trend is that there is a common thread where a preponderance of reporters has similar talking points concurrently. There is a groupthink that causes the media to focus on a particular phrase, word or subject. Like piranha on carcass, they hammer it home.

Since the new go to in Godwin’s Law is you are a racist and/or white supremacist, it makes for headlines that sell advertising. I can also be taken as ideological.  This is the de-facto statement now to the point that it has lost effectiveness.

Having spent decades working with (and against) all forms of media, they have a tendency to take the position of them being right, even if proven wrong. A correction is meaningless as once a statement is printed, it is still in the minds of the reader. Almost no one reads the corrections.

Most are journalists who write about a topic because it is assigned to them.  In the case of social media everyone thinks they have the moral high ground.


I’m not going to spend much time here, because most people have gotten into an Internet argument. Nobody wins unless the motive of one of the combatants is to piss off the other. It won’t matter how factual your argument is because it is just Internet road rage.

If you go to the above link, you see the outcome and great advice on how to handle this.

So the net result of overusing this theme is the same thing that happens with all overuse. Godwin’s Law is becoming meaningless. The definition of what racism really is and when the word should be used to protect the oppressed has been damaged. Even Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals suffers from overuse and tediousness.

The political landscape is a train wreck of who can sling the most mud. Watch the ratings nosedive for upcoming debates.

Stay out of it on Social Media except to observe who isn’t smart enough to stay out of this pool. With each use of the attack, the meaning becomes less valid and meaningful.

I thought about calling someone a racist instead of Hitler the Simonds Law, since I haven’t found this discussion fully hashed out, but I’d rather be associated with something more positive.

Everyone is a loser who engages in this behavior. My advice is grow up or be better educated to discuss your position better than: you are Hitler/racist/white supremacist and whatever the next insult is.

It used to be that to call someone Hitler was the ultimate insult, albeit the indication that the argument is lost.  Has calling them a racist and/or a white supremacist suffered the same fate?

Indicator That Harvard Might Not Be A Good Place To Study For Intellectuals

This post was supposed to fall in the intellectual category for people to decide if Harvard has the qualities that high IQ people still desire (such as being able to see/argue multiple sides of an issue).  They have managed to ruin any hope of defending both sides of an issue given the updates as you read them below.  I’ll leave it for those who may be on the fence, and wish them the best in their decision.

Original Post Begins Here

If you look at the previous post, you will see some of the traits you might have indicating a high intellect.

One of them is the ability to see and argue from multiple perspectives.  To have this trait, you have to shut out ideological thinking or persuasiveness of others before developing a hypothesis.  Many have preconceived thoughts on a subject, political stance or values influenced by others rather than examining all aspects of a subject.  In other words, they read one side of a subject on the Internet and believe what they want to.  Everyone has a bias, but one needs to come to problems with an open mind and use facts and history to evaluate the solution otherwise you run at least a 50% chance of being wrong.

Harvard has released their list of Fake News sites.  This is a popular subject given the 2016 Presidential election.  If you look at the coverage and predictions of the various news sites, you can come to a conclusion which ones were actually wrong (based on forecasts, coverage and predictions) and if their coverage was biased or indeed “Fake News”.  You have to make up your own mind where you stand on this.  I am not saying their position is necessarily wrong, rather questioning their intelligence.

The list is decidedly one-sided, showing a bias.  This is unfortunate.  Again, readers have to decide if this is correct or not.  No one or news institution is right or wrong 100% of the time.

In fair disclosure, one trait may indicate nothing, or it may be the bread crumb down the trail of truth if they are the institution they claim to be.  Once more, each must reach his or her own conclusion.  I show later in the post how I came to my decision about the title based more on empirical evidence.

Given the perceived prestige that comes with a Harvard degree (note: I did not say education), one would hope that the inflated price for such would be well spent money.  It would appear that their logic in such a one-sided position on what is “Fake News” doesn’t indicate that they show this intellectual trait.  You take a chance where to get an education or where you send your kids.  One just hopes that it is the right decision.  Since almost every decision is a cost/benefit analysis in your mind, one now must question if it is worth it.  Maybe your kid isn’t really an intellectual so the point might be moot.

I realize that you can develop relationships with power people at college that can advance a successful career.  It is not the point of this discussion.  I am merely observing a perceived status and whether it is justified or not.

Worst Update: Harvard is one of the top 10 suppressors of free speech, a further indicator that they are pushing away one of the attributes of intellectuals

Update: Harvard now supports segregation.  MLK would not have wanted this.

Update: Harvard Grad students have organized themselves to start a resistance school.

Update: Students don’t understand the danger of ISIS.

Update: You can now submit a rap album as a senior thesis instead of actual academic work.

Update: Harvard discriminates, avoids meritocracy and endorses legacy of the privileged

Update 2: Apparently, they have now abandoned diversity and have become racist, albeit not in the traditional way.

The grad students, who consider themselves a progressive version of “Dumbledore’s Army,” have enlisted former Obama staffers to teach the class sessions. The syllabus includes readings on “Black-Palestinian Queer Reciprocal Solidarity.”

They have decidedly taken a position of only viewing issues from one side.  One should greatly question the concept of critical thinking ability being taught there.  For those of us who can balance multiple views of the same subject, it is clear that these snowflakes will be under-educated and might be damaged goods in the marketplace of talent.

I formed my own opinion having worked for decades with Ivy League educated employees, albeit somewhat weighted towards Harvard and Columbia.  It was made exceedingly clear by a PR flak who after having worked with a number of Harvard MBA’s stated that they had obviously wasted their money on their education.  We were working for a prestigious company that attracts genius level talent.  She showed remarkable intuition that caused me to further observe the Ivy’s. The majority didn’t last as they had a piece of paper saying that they should be smart, but lacked an education in people or the understanding that life is a series of challenges and hurdles.

Some of the most successful executives and workers I’ve encountered didn’t rely on their degree in school, rather what they learned in life and how they applied it to the next problem.

While history reveals that many leaders and intelligent people came from Harvard, the direction they are heading and the principles that they now uphold should add some cost to the side of the cost/benefit decision making process.  I hope it’s worth it if you choose it as your place for an education.  You will apparently get an institution that has a bias.