thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-07-09--The Covid-19 Grand Schism: Skeptics vs. True Believers

any of us are still shell-shocked by the changes in our lives that have been imposed this spring .
We ’ re reacting to each unexpected event as it comes .
But to anyone who has stepped back to make sense of this web of contradictory messages that pour out of our newsfeeds , it is clear that the government agencies and corporate news media are slanting their message toward fear .
I am particularly concerned when they do this at the expense of honesty .
This is a moment for the scientific community to be engaging in spirited dialog @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debatei can we hope to shed light to guide the momentous public policy decisions that are being made , directing our culture and global economy into unexplored territory .
But instead of robust debate , what I see is a monolithic message , and censorship of the few brave scientists who dissent from that message .
I ’ m ashamed to say that the scientific community has been part of the problem .
I ’ m writing here about two issues : ( 1 ) Numbers reported by CDC have been gamed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second wave of a pandemic .
Instead of reporting COVID deaths , they began reported COVID cases .
Then they conflated recovered individuals ( who test positive for antibodies ) with current cases ( who test positive for the active virus ) .
No wonder numbers are rising !
( 2 ) A new report featured prominently in Nature purports to show that lockdowns have stemmed the spread of the virus and have saved lives .
The article is by the same team whose flawed models produced apocalyptic predictions last March that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The new computer model assumes from the start that the number of COVID deaths would have expanded exponentially from their March levels , and that social distancing is the only factor responsible for lower death rates .
That is , it assumes exactly what it purports to prove .
Where is accountability ?
Why is this perspective promoted in the world ’ s most prestigious journal , while reasonable doubts are swept aside ?
The global death rate from COVID-19 is down to about 4,000 per day .
It is not even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is lower than traffic deaths , lower than diarrhea .
Even compared to other respiratory infections , COVID is now a minority .
In the US , daily COVID deaths peaked in April , and are now down to 1/10 the peak rate , at about 400/day .
COVID is now the sixth leading cause of death in America , but it no longer registers as a bump in total mortality .
But the headlines claim we are in the midst of a “ second wave ” , based on reported numbers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over-reported .
Hospitals are incentivized to diagnose COVID with Medicare reimbursement rates that are higher than other diseases , and guaranteed coverage from every major insurer .
Doctors are being instructed to report COVID as a cause of death when no testing is done , and when chronic illnesses contributed to the outcome .
And with all this , the number of deaths continues to fall , even as the reported number of cases is rising .
Why is this ?
In part , the lower fatality rate is real .
Doctors are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease .
More chloroquine and zinc , less intubation .
Like all viruses , this one is evolving toward greater contagion and lower lethality .
But the most important explanation is an artifact in the way COVID cases are being reported .
Before May 18 , the “ case count ” was based on tests for the live virus , and counted only sick people .
Then the definition was changed to count both people who tested positive for the virus and for antibodies to the virus .
The latter group is mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or who developed antibodies with exposure .
As the number of recovered patients increases , of course the rate of positive tests will increase .
In the past , Neil Ferguson ’ s group at Imperial College of London has produced scary computer models that overestimated the epidemics of Mad Cow Disease , Avian Flu , Swine Flu , and the 2003 SARS outbreak .
In March , his group ’ s computer model was justification for England , Europe and America to shut down economies , prevent people talking and meeting , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every kind of public gathering , throw tens of millions of people out of work , deny the rights to freedom of assembly that are fundamental to democratic governance .
His manuscript was not even peer reviewed , but only posted on a university server .
Even before its details and assumptions were made known , the integrity of the model was assailed by other experts , including Stephen Eubank ( UVA Biocomplexity Institute ) and Yaneer Bar-Yam ( New England Complex Systems Inst ) .
After details of the assumptions were revealed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ model was widely scorned by real experts ( e.g .
Andrew Gelman ) and self-appointed pundits ( Elon Musk ) .
I have enough experience with computer models to know that results are often highly leveraged with respect to details of the input .
Sensitivity analysis is essential for interpreting results , but is almost never done .
Too often , the output is reported without the qualification that small changes to the input produce very different results .
Against this background , the high-profile publication in Nature of Ferguson ’ s recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought he had no credibility left among serious modelers of epidemiology , but I have ceased to be surprised when politics trumps competence for access to the most prestigious publication venues .
They analyze spread of COVID in 11 Eurpoean countries this Spring , averaging over different countries but not contrasting the different local strategies .
They take death counts as surrogate for case counts because reports of case counts are even more unreliable than death counts .
But ( one of several crucial failures ) they don ’ t apply a time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They take as input for each country the dates on which each of three different isolation strategies was implemented .
They assume that the virus would have spread exponentially but for these measures , and credit the isolation measures with the entire difference between reported death rates and the theoretical exponential curve .
They conclude that Europe has dodged a bullet , that less than 4 % of people had been infected , and by implication the lockdown has saved the other 96 % .
They imply but don ’ t state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 million deaths in Europe instead of ~150,000 reported when the paper was written .
It is obvious that lockdown and social isolation slow the spread of the disease , but not obvious that they affect the eventual reach of the disease .
Thus it is an open question whether the public policy prevented or only delayed deaths from COVID .
This question can be addressed most directly by comparing regions that were locked down with regions that remained open .
Instead of doing this , the Ferguson group lumped all regions together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scenario in which the exponential curve would have expanded to infect every susceptible person in Europe .
There are fundamentally two hypotheses about the epidemiological events of this spring : Either the number of people exposed has been high and the fatality rate low , or else the number of people exposed has been low and the fatality rate higher .
People in the first camp argue that the exposed population is over 50 % in Europe and America , approaching or exceeding herd immunity , and the population death rate is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ camp , people estimate the population exposure about ten times lower ( 5 % ) and the fatality rate correspondingly higher ( 0.005 ) .
The story told by people in the first camp is that social distancing slowed but did not prevent transmission of the disease through the population .
By now , the presence of the virus is waning because people in many places have already been exposed .
The story of Ferguson and others in the second camp is that social distancing actually stopped spread of the virus , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have never been exposed .
It follows that if we ease restrictions , there is another wave of infections ahead , potentially 20 times larger than the first wave .
The deep flaw of the recent Ferguson paper is that his team does not consider the first scenario at all .
Built into their model , they assume that population level immunity is negligible , and the only thing that has slowed spread of the virus has been social distancing .
This is where they put the rabbit in the hat .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how would it have compared ?
To choose between the two hypotheses , we might compare a region before and after lockdown , or we might compare regions that locked down with regions that didn ’ t .
In a preprint response to Ferguson , Homburg and Kuhbandner do a good job with the first approach .
They take Ferguson to task for not considering the immunity that spreads through the population along with the disease .
They show that exponential expansion had already slowed in England before the effect of the lockdown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Lockdown went into effect in Britain on March 23 .
If lockdown had a benefit , it would be in preventing new cases , and its effect on the death rate would show up about 23 days later ( April 14 ) , because 23 days is the median time to fatality for those patients who die of COVID .
In the graph , we see that the death rate had already leveled off by April 14 .
On this log graph , an exponential increase would appear as a straight line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the exponential expansion phase ended long before the lockdown could have had any effect .
Not only weren ’ t the numbers expanding exponentially , but the death rate had already started to decline before April 14 , when the effect of lockdown was expected to kick in .
The authors state they performed the same analysis for 10 other countries in the Ferguson study with similar results , though they show the graph for Great Britain alone .
Here in the US , there was a natural experiment when people emerged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police brutality at the end of May .
Social distancing in this environment has been impossible .
Allowing for a 23-day lag , we should have seen a surge in US mortality starting mid-June .
In the plot below , there appears to be a leveling off of the death rate since mid-June , but no new disaster .
This alone is strong evidence that US has substantial herd immunity , and that most of the population has already been exposed to the virus .
A second way to distinguish between the two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down with regions that didn ’ t .
One of their 11 European countries was Sweden , where the economy was kept open and quarantine was limited to people who were symptomatic with COVID .
It is a glaring defect in the Nature paper that Sweden is lumped in with the other ten countries when it should have been contrasted .
In fact , the mortality curve for Sweden was typical for the other ten countries , even as commercial and cultural institutions in Sweden continued normal operations .
Sweden has had a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , France , and Denmark , but lower than Belgium , Italy , Spain , or UK .
There is no evidence that Sweden ’ s COVID mortality was higher for having bucked the trend to remain open , but some indication that Germany and Austria had particularly effective containment policies .
We can ask the same question of the different states in the USA .
Comparing death rates from COVID in the 42 states that locked down with 8 states that did not lock down , this article finds that the death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times higher .
( Caveat : there was no correction for urban vs rural or for demographic differences . )
The author concludes , “ With the evidence coming in that the lockdowns were neither economically nor medically effective , it is going to be increasingly difficult for lockdown partisans to marshal the evidence to convince the public that isolating people , destroying businesses , and destroying social institutions was worth it.
” I ’ ve prepared a comparison of all states ranked by COVID mortality which you can view here .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing to fear but fear itself .
It is common for government leaders to dispel panic because they know that a nation can better thrive when people feel confident and secure .
Even G.W .
Bush responded to the terror attacks of 9/11 by telling the American people , “ keep shopping.
” On the other side , despots sow fear in their subjects when they want to consolidate autocratic power , and when they want to stir up fervor for war .
It is clear from messaging in the corporate media that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create more fear than is warranted .
• None The fatality rate was vastly overestimated initially , and even now is probably overestimated at 0.002 to 0.005 • None Doctors were told to report deaths from COVID without proof that COVID was the cause • None Repeated warnings of a second wave , etc , which has not materialized .
• None of tests for well-studied , cheap treatments ( chloroquine ) while jumping into large-scale tests of vaccines that have Suppression of tests for well-studied , cheap treatments ( chloroquine ) while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have not yet been tested on animals • None ref , No mention of vitamin D , which is a simple , cheap , and effective way people can lower their risk .
[ ref ref ] .
Our own CDC is silent , while the British equivalent agency actively discourages vitamin D for COVID prevention .
• None The biggest scandal of all is that lockdown has been authorized in the US and elsewhere based on hypothetical safety benefits with no consideration of costs .
Our health is affected by our communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives , and our livelihoods .
[ Yale epidemiologist David Katz politely makes this point . ]
Shamefully , the scientific community has been complicit in the campaign of fear .
A handful of courageous doctors and epidemiologists have been outspoken .
In addition to Katz , John Ioannidis and Knut Wittkowski are best known to me .
But the most trusted journals continue to publish articles that are based on politics rather than sound science .
Who is benefiting from the international panic ?
Who is behind the media campaign and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their intention ?
I invite people who are more politically astute than I to speculate on these questions .

M
any of us are still shell-shocked by the changes in our lives that have been imposed this spring. We’re reacting to each unexpected event as it comes. But to anyone who has stepped back to make sense of this web of contradictory messages that pour out of our newsfeeds, it is clear that the government agencies and corporate news media are slanting their message toward fear. I am particularly concerned when they do this at the expense of honesty. This is a moment for the scientific community to be engaging in spirited dialog among diverse voices. Only with open debatei can we hope to shed light to guide the momentous public policy decisions that are being made, directing our culture and global economy into unexplored territory. But instead of robust debate, what I see is a monolithic message, and censorship of the few brave scientists who dissent from that message. I’m ashamed to say that the scientific community has been part of the problem.
I’m writing here about two issues:
(1) Numbers reported by CDC have been gamed to make it appear that America is in the second wave of a pandemic. Instead of reporting COVID deaths, they began reported COVID cases. Then they conflated recovered individuals (who test positive for antibodies) with current cases (who test positive for the active virus). No wonder numbers are rising!
(2) A new report featured prominently in Nature purports to show that lockdowns have stemmed the spread of the virus and have saved lives. The article is by the same team whose flawed models produced apocalyptic predictions last March that justified lockdowns in Europe and the US. The new computer model assumes from the start that the number of COVID deaths would have expanded exponentially from their March levels, and that social distancing is the only factor responsible for lower death rates. That is, it assumes exactly what it purports to prove. Where is accountability? Why is this perspective promoted in the world’s most prestigious journal, while reasonable doubts are swept aside?
Part One—CDC reporting
The global death rate from COVID-19 is down to about 4,000 per day. It is not even among the top ten causes. COVID is lower than traffic deaths, lower than diarrhea. Even compared to other respiratory infections, COVID is now a minority.
In the US, daily COVID deaths peaked in April, and are now down to 1/10 the peak rate, at about 400/day. COVID is now the sixth leading cause of death in America, but it no longer registers as a bump in total mortality.
But the headlines claim we are in the midst of a “second wave”, based on reported numbers of cases.
Deaths from COVID are being over-reported. Hospitals are incentivized to diagnose COVID with Medicare reimbursement rates that are higher than other diseases, and guaranteed coverage from every major insurer. Doctors are being instructed to report COVID as a cause of death when no testing is done, and when chronic illnesses contributed to the outcome. And with all this, the number of deaths continues to fall, even as the reported number of cases is rising. Why is this?
In part, the lower fatality rate is real. Doctors are learning from experience how to treat the disease. More chloroquine and zinc, less intubation. Like all viruses, this one is evolving toward greater contagion and lower lethality. But the most important explanation is an artifact in the way COVID cases are being reported. Before May 18, the “case count” was based on tests for the live virus, and counted only sick people. Then the definition was changed to count both people who tested positive for the virus and for antibodies to the virus. The latter group is mostly people who have recovered from COVID, or who developed antibodies with exposure. As the number of recovered patients increases, of course the rate of positive tests will increase.
Part Two—Models that “prove” lockdown has saved lives
In the past, Neil Ferguson’s group at Imperial College of London has produced scary computer models that overestimated the epidemics of Mad Cow Disease, Avian Flu, Swine Flu, and the 2003 SARS outbreak. In March, his group’s computer model was justification for England, Europe and America to shut down economies, prevent people talking and meeting, prohibit concerts and theater and church and every kind of public gathering, throw tens of millions of people out of work, deny the rights to freedom of assembly that are fundamental to democratic governance. His manuscript was not even peer reviewed, but only posted on a university server. Even before its details and assumptions were made known, the integrity of the model was assailed by other experts, including Stephen Eubank (UVA Biocomplexity Institute) and Yaneer Bar-Yam (New England Complex Systems Inst). After details of the assumptions were revealed at the end of April, the model was widely scorned by real experts (e.g. Andrew Gelman) and self-appointed pundits (Elon Musk).
I have enough experience with computer models to know that results are often highly leveraged with respect to details of the input. Sensitivity analysis is essential for interpreting results, but is almost never done. Too often, the output is reported without the qualification that small changes to the input produce very different results.
Against this background, the high-profile publication in Nature of Ferguson’s recent work is suspicious. I would have thought he had no credibility left among serious modelers of epidemiology, but I have ceased to be surprised when politics trumps competence for access to the most prestigious publication venues.
The Ferguson Article Vindicating Lockdown
They analyze spread of COVID in 11 Eurpoean countries this Spring, averaging over different countries but not contrasting the different local strategies. They take death counts as surrogate for case counts because reports of case counts are even more unreliable than death counts. But (one of several crucial failures) they don’t apply a time lag between death counts and case counts.
They take as input for each country the dates on which each of three different isolation strategies was implemented. They assume that the virus would have spread exponentially but for these measures, and credit the isolation measures with the entire difference between reported death rates and the theoretical exponential curve.
They conclude that Europe has dodged a bullet, that less than 4% of people had been infected, and by implication the lockdown has saved the other 96%. They imply but don’t state explicitly that there would have been about 4 million deaths in Europe instead of ~150,000 reported when the paper was written.
It is obvious that lockdown and social isolation slow the spread of the disease, but not obvious that they affect the eventual reach of the disease. Thus it is an open question whether the public policy prevented or only delayed deaths from COVID. This question can be addressed most directly by comparing regions that were locked down with regions that remained open. Instead of doing this, the Ferguson group lumped all regions together and compared their results with an unrealistic scenario in which the exponential curve would have expanded to infect every susceptible person in Europe.
Two schools of thought
There are fundamentally two hypotheses about the epidemiological events of this spring: Either the number of people exposed has been high and the fatality rate low, or else the number of people exposed has been low and the fatality rate higher. People in the first camp argue that the exposed population is over 50% in Europe and America, approaching or exceeding herd immunity, and the population death rate is in the range 0.0005. In the second camp, people estimate the population exposure about ten times lower (5%) and the fatality rate correspondingly higher (0.005).
The story told by people in the first camp is that social distancing slowed but did not prevent transmission of the disease through the population. By now, the presence of the virus is waning because people in many places have already been exposed.
The story of Ferguson and others in the second camp is that social distancing actually stopped spread of the virus, so that most people in Europe and American have never been exposed. It follows that if we ease restrictions, there is another wave of infections ahead, potentially 20 times larger than the first wave.
The deep flaw of the recent Ferguson paper is that his team does not consider the first scenario at all. Built into their model, they assume that population level immunity is negligible, and the only thing that has slowed spread of the virus has been social distancing. This is where they put the rabbit in the hat.
If they had considered the alternative hypothesis, how would it have compared?
To choose between the two hypotheses, we might compare a region before and after lockdown, or we might compare regions that locked down with regions that didn’t.
In a preprint response to Ferguson, Homburg and Kuhbandner do a good job with the first approach. They take Ferguson to task for not considering the immunity that spreads through the population along with the disease. They show that exponential expansion had already slowed in England before the effect of the lockdown on mortality data could have been felt.
Lockdown went into effect in Britain on March 23. If lockdown had a benefit, it would be in preventing new cases, and its effect on the death rate would show up about 23 days later (April 14), because 23 days is the median time to fatality for those patients who die of COVID. In the graph, we see that the death rate had already leveled off by April 14.
On this log graph, an exponential increase would appear as a straight line sloping upward. It’s clear that the exponential expansion phase ended long before the lockdown could have had any effect. Not only weren’t the numbers expanding exponentially, but the death rate had already started to decline before April 14, when the effect of lockdown was expected to kick in. The authors state they performed the same analysis for 10 other countries in the Ferguson study with similar results, though they show the graph for Great Britain alone.
“We demonstrate that the United Kingdom’s lockdown was both superfluous and ineffective.”
— [Homburg and Kuhbandner]
Here in the US, there was a natural experiment when people emerged into the streets to protest racism and police brutality at the end of May. Social distancing in this environment has been impossible. Allowing for a 23-day lag, we should have seen a surge in US mortality starting mid-June. In the plot below, there appears to be a leveling off of the death rate since mid-June, but no new disaster. This alone is strong evidence that US has substantial herd immunity, and that most of the population has already been exposed to the virus.
A second way to distinguish between the two hypotheses is to compare regions that locked down with regions that didn’t. One of their 11 European countries was Sweden, where the economy was kept open and quarantine was limited to people who were symptomatic with COVID. It is a glaring defect in the Nature paper that Sweden is lumped in with the other ten countries when it should have been contrasted. In fact, the mortality curve for Sweden was typical for the other ten countries, even as commercial and cultural institutions in Sweden continued normal operations. Sweden has had a higher death rate than Austria, Germany, France, and Denmark, but lower than Belgium, Italy, Spain, or UK. There is no evidence that Sweden’s COVID mortality was higher for having bucked the trend to remain open, but some indication that Germany and Austria had particularly effective containment policies.
We can ask the same question of the different states in the USA. Comparing death rates from COVID in the 42 states that locked down with 8 states that did not lock down, this article finds that the death rates in locked down states was 4 times higher. (Caveat: there was no correction for urban vs rural or for demographic differences.) The author concludes, “With the evidence coming in that the lockdowns were neither economically nor medically effective, it is going to be increasingly difficult for lockdown partisans to marshal the evidence to convince the public that isolating people, destroying businesses, and destroying social institutions was worth it.”
I’ve prepared a comparison of all states ranked by COVID mortality which you can view here.
The Politics of COVID
In 1933, Roosevelt told America we had nothing to fear but fear itself. It is common for government leaders to dispel panic because they know that a nation can better thrive when people feel confident and secure. Even G.W. Bush responded to the terror attacks of 9/11 by telling the American people, “keep shopping.” On the other side, despots sow fear in their subjects when they want to consolidate autocratic power, and when they want to stir up fervor for war.
It is clear from messaging in the corporate media that the COVID pandemic is being hyped to create more fear than is warranted.
The fatality rate was vastly overestimated initially, and even now is probably overestimated at 0.002 to 0.005
Doctors were told to report deaths from COVID without proof that COVID was the cause
Reimbursement incentives for hospitals to diagnose COVID
Repeated warnings of a second wave, etc, which has not materialized.
Suppression of tests for well-studied, cheap treatments (chloroquine) while jumping into large-scale tests of vaccines that have not yet been tested on animals
ref, No mention of vitamin D, which is a simple, cheap, and effective way people can lower their risk. [ ref ref ]. Our own CDC is silent, while the British equivalent agency actively discourages vitamin D for COVID prevention.
The biggest scandal of all is that lockdown has been authorized in the US and elsewhere based on hypothetical safety benefits with no consideration of costs. Our health is affected by our communities, our cultural lives, our social lives, and our livelihoods. [Yale epidemiologist David Katz politely makes this point.]
Shamefully, the scientific community has been complicit in the campaign of fear. A handful of courageous doctors and epidemiologists have been outspoken. In addition to Katz, John Ioannidis and Knut Wittkowski are best known to me. But the most trusted journals continue to publish articles that are based on politics rather than sound science.
Who is benefiting from the international panic? Who is behind the media campaign and the distortion of science, and what is their intention?
I invite people who are more politically astute than I to speculate on these questions.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-07-10--CHOP-CHAZ Folded, Threw Support Behind Joe Biden

Joe Biden is an establishment stalwart .
He will be whatever the DNC and its wealthy controllers want him to be .
When the elite told Bill Clinton to kill Serbians , Joe was onboard .
He argued in favor of the Iraq invasion that has thus far killed around 1.5 million people .
The LGBT crowd should understand that Joe was an ardent supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act .
As for BLM , they should look into Biden ’ s opposition to desegregation busing .
He spoke to a crowd in Delaware opposed to integration .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1994 crime bill .
It resulted in mass incarceration and longer prison sentences for Black Americans .
It further warped the judicial system .
Biden helped author and worked to pass the racist federal mass incarceration Three Strikes crime bill of 1994 .
He has boasted of his ability to work with segregationists as a U.S. senator in the 1970s , when he opposed federal desegregation busing orders and worried about sending his children to desegregated schools .
“ Much of the modern controversy around the bill surrounds the view that it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people of color , ” writes Joseph Lyttleton .
“ The bill has also led more defendants to take plea deals and accept prison time without a trial to avoid a much more severe punishment if found guilty , even when innocent.
” None of this matters , of course .
It ’ s like this every election — a choice between the “ lesser of two evils ” — and come November Democrats will overlook Joe ’ s racial sins because they are focused on getting rid of Trump .
The hypocrisy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kids and their BLM comrades will vote for Biden and thus the military-industrial complex wars , financial ripoffs by the elite , all-encompassing surveillance , censorship of political opponents , and the neoliberal creed destroying much of the world .

Joe Biden is an establishment stalwart. He will be whatever the DNC and its wealthy controllers want him to be.
Seattle CHOP leaders urge protesters to go home, throw support behind Biden, Democrats https://t.co/T4R8YEKNMU #FoxNews
— Harold J.L. Connett (@HaroldJLConnett) June 25, 2020
When the elite told Bill Clinton to kill Serbians, Joe was onboard. He argued in favor of the Iraq invasion that has thus far killed around 1.5 million people. The LGBT crowd should understand that Joe was an ardent supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act. As for BLM, they should look into Biden’s opposition to desegregation busing. He spoke to a crowd in Delaware opposed to integration. He pushed hard for the passage of the 1994 crime bill. It resulted in mass incarceration and longer prison sentences for Black Americans. It further warped the judicial system.
Paul Street writes:
Biden helped author and worked to pass the racist federal mass incarceration Three Strikes crime bill of 1994. He has boasted of his ability to work with segregationists as a U.S. senator in the 1970s, when he opposed federal desegregation busing orders and worried about sending his children to desegregated schools.
this Biden clip from 1993 is…outright fascist. 10X worse than Clinton's "super predator" line (via @KFILE) https://t.co/k8d0Icq50mhttps://t.co/77aDBUKznP
— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) March 7, 2019
“Much of the modern controversy around the bill surrounds the view that it has led to mass incarceration, especially among people of color,” writes Joseph Lyttleton. “The bill has also led more defendants to take plea deals and accept prison time without a trial to avoid a much more severe punishment if found guilty, even when innocent.”
None of this matters, of course. It’s like this every election — a choice between the “lesser of two evils” — and come November Democrats will overlook Joe’s racial sins because they are focused on getting rid of Trump.
The hypocrisy here is simply astounding. The CHAZ kids and their BLM comrades will vote for Biden and thus the military-industrial complex wars, financial ripoffs by the elite, all-encompassing surveillance, censorship of political opponents, and the neoliberal creed destroying much of the world.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-07-10--The Dogs Of Empire!  (Video & Text)

The Dogs Of Empire!  (Video & Text)

BE SURE TO PASS THESE ARTICLES TO FRIENDS AND KIN .
A LOT DEPENDS ON THIS .
DO YOUR PART .
ll Americans of any persuasion need to search the archives of both the Nazi Holocaust and the 1950- 1960s Civil Rights movement .
One will see , quite vividly , the use of trained , tough and violent dogs on unarmed civilians .
In Germany it was Jews and political rivals ( Communists and Social Democrats ) that were set upon by men with sticks and whips leading those vicious dogs .
In the south , circa the 50s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true .
Well , under this current far right wing , Neo Fascist ( Neo Nazi ? )
administration , private companies have secured ' Blackwater type ' goons , replete with their weapons and trained dogs ( read Jeremy Scahill 's brilliant 2007 book Blackwater : The Rise of the World 's Most Powerful Mercenary Army ) .
Case in point is what happened in September of 2016 in North Dakota at the Dakota Access Pipeline construction site .
Indigenous tribal members , along with other peaceful protestors , concerned with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , raised hell in a protracted struggle to stop the pipeline .
The hired thugs and their dogs , along with lots of pepper spray , attacked the unarmed , peaceful , but vehement group .
All in a day 's work , yes ?
My title seems to refer to dogs .
In reality , who are the dogs in question ?
Man 's best friend was NOT born mean , rather had to be taught so .
I guess you can say the same for the goons that are always available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Sometimes the goons are from the same race and class as those they attack .
One can study India , before independence , to see how the low level indigenous police were used by the Brits to ' Keep the rabble in line ' .
The Brits were shrewder than we here in Amerika .
Here it became , for God knows how long ( still ? )
, whereupon whites did the policing everywhere , including in the minority sections of towns .
If one looks at the footage of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wo n't see any non whites shooting the pepper spray as they sicced their dogs .
It seems our empire always has a full supply of ' Dogs ' to do their bidding .
Sadly , if one could study the US grunts , our 'Boots on the ground , from Iraq ( phony wars ) 1 and 2 and Afghanistan , one sees the race and class of the overwhelming majority of them .
Dark and brown faces , mostly from low income areas of Amerika ( watch Michael Moore 's brilliant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with their equally low income white counterparts , simply for the money and perks , for a chance to get out of the ghetto .
They were not just super patriotic kids who wanted to kill the A-Rabs ( there was a smaller percentage of those types , but not abundant in numbers ) .
No , between our own home grown kids and the highly paid goons of empire from private security firms like Blackwater ( now called Xe Services ) , who by the way earn 10 to 20 times MORE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empire has plenty of Dogs of War at its disposal ... and that word seems to fit .
ABOVE : Note the thugs in civvies handling the dogs .
Who the hell are they ?
There 's always an ample supply of them to put down domestic insurgencies .
As usual , the TV whore media , serving distorted headlines , did not care to ask .
IN my recent interview with Dr. TP Wilkinson on his history of policing in Amerika , we learn that these original ' Dogs ' were called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They were hired by the plantation owners to go and find runaway slaves and bring them back ... for a bounty .
After the Civil War local police in All parts of Amerika were used primarily to ' Keep watch ' on the factories and businesses of the super rich , to , well , ' Keep the rabble ( unions and striking workers ) in line ' .
This has continued throughout the decades , from the coal mining areas , the agricultural fields , factory assembly lines ... anywhere that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ punch out products for their enormous profits .
It never changes .
Why ?
Well , when you have a ' Bought and paid for ' Two Party/One Party con job , there is little or NO representation for working stiffs .
Never was .
One hopes that someday , as in the great John Sayles 1987 film classic Matawan , about the 1920 Mingo County , West Virginia coal miners ' strike , those who are supposed to ' Serve and Protect ' do so for working stiffs FIRST !
Do n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blame those who enticed them to do those evil deeds also .

BE SURE TO PASS THESE ARTICLES TO FRIENDS AND KIN. A LOT DEPENDS ON THIS. DO YOUR PART.
Philip Farruggio OpEds
A
ll Americans of any persuasion need to search the archives of both the Nazi Holocaust and the 1950- 1960s Civil Rights movement. One will see, quite vividly, the use of trained, tough and violent dogs on unarmed civilians. In Germany it was Jews and political rivals ( Communists and Social Democrats) that were set upon by men with sticks and whips leading those vicious dogs. In the south, circa the 50s and 60s, the same scenario held true. Well, under this current far right wing, Neo Fascist ( Neo Nazi?) administration, private companies have secured ' Blackwater type' goons, replete with their weapons and trained dogs ( read Jeremy Scahill's brilliant 2007 book Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army). Case in point is what happened in September of 2016 in North Dakota at the Dakota Access Pipeline construction site. Indigenous tribal members, along with other peaceful protestors, concerned with the damage to their lands and clean water, raised hell in a protracted struggle to stop the pipeline. The hired thugs and their dogs, along with lots of pepper spray, attacked the unarmed, peaceful , but vehement group. All in a day's work, yes?
My title seems to refer to dogs. In reality, who are the dogs in question? Man's best friend was NOT born mean, rather had to be taught so. I guess you can say the same for the goons that are always available to do the bidding of the empire. Sometimes the goons are from the same race and class as those they attack. One can study India, before independence, to see how the low level indigenous police were used by the Brits to ' Keep the rabble in line'. The Brits were shrewder than we here in Amerika. Here it became, for God knows how long ( still?), whereupon whites did the policing everywhere, including in the minority sections of towns. If one looks at the footage of that North Dakota 2016 pipeline protest, you won't see any non whites shooting the pepper spray as they sicced their dogs.
It seems our empire always has a full supply of ' Dogs' to do their bidding. Sadly, if one could study the US grunts, our 'Boots on the ground, from Iraq ( phony wars ) 1 and 2 and Afghanistan, one sees the race and class of the overwhelming majority of them. Dark and brown faces, mostly from low income areas of Amerika ( watch Michael Moore's brilliant 2004 film Fahrenheit 911) joined up with their equally low income white counterparts, simply for the money and perks, for a chance to get out of the ghetto. They were not just super patriotic kids who wanted to kill the A-Rabs (there was a smaller percentage of those types, but not abundant in numbers). No, between our own home grown kids and the highly paid goons of empire from private security firms like Blackwater ( now called Xe Services ) , who by the way earn 10 to 20 times MORE than our people in uniform, the empire has plenty of Dogs of War at its disposal... and that word seems to fit.
ABOVE: Note the thugs in civvies handling the dogs. Who the hell are they? There's always an ample supply of them to put down domestic insurgencies. As usual, the TV whore media, serving distorted headlines, did not care to ask.
IN my recent interview with Dr. TP Wilkinson on his history of policing in Amerika, we learn that these original ' Dogs' were called the Slave Patrols in the south. They were hired by the plantation owners to go and find runaway slaves and bring them back... for a bounty. After the Civil War local police in All parts of Amerika were used primarily to ' Keep watch ' on the factories and businesses of the super rich, to , well, ' Keep the rabble ( unions and striking workers ) in line'. This has continued throughout the decades, from the coal mining areas, the agricultural fields, factory assembly lines... anywhere that the super rich employ lower paid drones to punch out products for their enormous profits. It never changes. Why? Well, when you have a ' Bought and paid for ' Two Party/One Party con job, there is little or NO representation for working stiffs. Never was. One hopes that someday, as in the great John Sayles 1987 film classic Matawan, about the 1920 Mingo County, West Virginia coal miners' strike, those who are supposed to ' Serve and Protect' do so for working stiffs FIRST!
Don't just blame the dogs of empire... blame those who enticed them to do those evil deeds also.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-07-12--How Democrats Are Deceived

How Democrats Are Deceived

Another important dispatch from The Greanville Post .
Be sure to share it widely .
This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches by historian Eric Zuesse emocrats are deceived in basically the same way that Republicans are , but by a different group of billionaires .
Both of America ’ s political parties try to get their dupes to donate or subscribe to their propaganda-media , but will continue operating them regardless , because their billionaires actually own and advertise in these ‘ news ’ -media , and so subscribers to those media aren ’ t really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the cake.
” Their paying subscribers reduce the amount that the Party ’ s billionaires will need to spend in order to produce and distribute their propaganda .
Here is a typical example of this : Maybe Putin ’ s spies were onto something .
In June 2015 — nine months before targeting the Hillary Clinton campaign , and a full year before the world learned about their hacking of the DNC — Russia ’ s military intelligence division tried to hack the accounts of journalists , including a number of Daily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party site considers Russia , China , Iran , Venezuela , etc.
, to be enemies of America ; and it considers Israel , Poland , UK , Saudi Arabia , UAE , Qatar , etc.
, to be America ’ s allies .
They don ’ t really say why .
But they do .
Shachtman and his site are propagandists for every invasion of every country whose head-of-state isn ’ t allied with the U.S. against Russia .
( So too are Republican sites — but their central bugaboo is instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s so simple , really .
Saddam Hussein wasn ’ t anti-Russian , so he got knocked off .
Muammar Qadaffi wasn ’ t , so he also did .
Bashar al-Assad isn ’ t anti-Russian , so “ regime change ” there is still being attempted .
Nicolas Maduro isn ’ t anti-Russian , so America is trying to grab Venezuela ’ s oil and is blockading Venezuela to starve the public there into a ‘ revolution ’ .
Ditto Iran .
Viktor Yanukovych wasn ’ t anti-Russian , so American ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beast portrayed him as being pro-Russian and even as being an enemy , even though he was neither but was just trying to keep Ukraine “ neutral ” or not hostile toward either America or his next-door-neighbor Russia .
On 12 April 2010 Yanukovych met the U.S. President at the White House , to which Obama had invited him , but Yanukovych refused Obama ’ s suggestions that Ukraine join America ’ s alliance against Ukraine ’ s next-door neighbor Russia .
On 2 July 2010 , U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Kiev , where '' We discussed ways that Ukraine and the United States can deepen and expand our strategic partnership , moving forward with the work of the U.S.-Ukraine Strategic Partnership Commission that I co-chair .
… And the United States welcomes Ukrainian parliament 's decision to approve foreign military exercises on Ukrainian territory in 2010 and we thank Ukraine and the Ukrainian people for your important contributions to NATO and other international security operations .
… And as I said , we are grateful for Ukraine 's contributions to NATO security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
And we look forward to the joint U.S.-Ukraine military exercises .
And we also support a relationship with Russia that is in Ukraine 's interest that helps to further what President Obama has called the resetting of relations with Russia . ''
Back before the invasion and occupation of Iraq , Shachtman had been a lowly “ Contributor ” to a digital ‘ news ’ site “ Tech Central Station , ” which billed itself as “ Where Free Markets Meet Technology ” and this was actually a MIC ( military-industrial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contractor financed ) propaganda site .
On 22 January 2003 , two months before America invaded and destroyed Iraq , that ‘ contributor ’ headlined there , and opened : “ Predator drones are the high-tech darlings of the new war .
Too bad they 're so slow , dumb , noisy , and near-sighted that almost anything stronger than a peashooter could take them down.
” ‘ Defense ’ spending needs to be increased — that was the pitch .
Otherwise , America ’ s drones could become the Taliban ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — “ prey.
” Even “ entertainment ” news in America is often used in order to boost sales for corporations such as Lockheed Martin — America ’ s megacorporations whose main or only customer is the U.S. Government itself .
For example , on the July 4th edition of NPR ’ s “ All Things Considered ” was a plug for a movie that aims to persuade viewers that America ’ s invading troops need more and better weapons ; the movie is called “ Outpost ” and it ’ s filmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MIC publicity that ’ s funded by NPR ’ s donors ) had Sacha Pfeiffer interviewing its director , Rod Lurie .
This was a skillful sales-pitch for the movie , and for the entire MIC that the movie promotes .
It ’ s not enough that America ’ s Government already spends around half of the entire world ’ s annual military exenditures .
More , !
!
Conquest is costly .
( Even when it fails to conquer . )
And those billionaires want the public to spend even more to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billionaires are selling to the U.S. Government and its allies .
In America and its allies , this is what ’ s called “ capitalism , ” and “ the free market.
” And “ patriotism.
” Just right for July 4th .
Very ‘ right ’ .
Shoot those ‘ Reds !
’

Another important dispatch from The Greanville Post. Be sure to share it widely.
This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches by historian Eric Zuesse
D emocrats are deceived in basically the same way that Republicans are, but by a different group of billionaires. Both of America’s political parties try to get their dupes to donate or subscribe to their propaganda-media, but will continue operating them regardless, because their billionaires actually own and advertise in these ‘news’-media, and so subscribers to those media aren’t really needed, but are just “icing on the cake.” Their paying subscribers reduce the amount that the Party’s billionaires will need to spend in order to produce and distribute their propaganda. Here is a typical example of this:
Noah Shachtman is the Editor-in-Chief of the Democratic Party billionaires’ Daily Beast ‘news’ site. On 29 October 2018, he headlined there, say they do. is the Editor-in-Chief of the Democratic Party billionaires’ Daily Beast ‘news’ site. On 29 October 2018, he headlined there, "Why The Daily Beast Matters Now More Than Ever” , and the article sub-headed “Journalism today has to paint in bright colors, have a sense of wit, and give up any attachments to the powerful. It’s gonzo or go home.” So, he and his site is “gonzo,” and they “give up any attachments to the powerful.” At least theythey do.
He opened:
Maybe Putin’s spies were onto something.
In June 2015 — nine months before targeting the Hillary Clinton campaign, and a full year before the world learned about their hacking of the DNC — Russia’s military intelligence division tried to hack the accounts of journalists, including a number of Daily Beast reporters and alumni.
(Sure — the reason why Hillary lost isn’t Hillary — it is Putin! Just like the reason Trump won’t win isn’t Trump — it will be ‘them!’, whomever ‘they’ will be: maybe “Democrats.”)
That Democratic Party site considers Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc., to be enemies of America; and it considers Israel, Poland, UK, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, etc., to be America’s allies. They don’t really say why. But they do.
Shachtman and his site are propagandists for every invasion of every country whose head-of-state isn’t allied with the U.S. against Russia. (So too are Republican sites — but their central bugaboo is instead ‘China!’) It’s so simple, really. Saddam Hussein wasn’t anti-Russian, so he got knocked off. Muammar Qadaffi wasn’t, so he also did. Bashar al-Assad isn’t anti-Russian, so “regime change” there is still being attempted. Nicolas Maduro isn’t anti-Russian, so America is trying to grab Venezuela’s oil and is blockading Venezuela to starve the public there into a ‘revolution’. Ditto Iran. Viktor Yanukovych wasn’t anti-Russian, so American ‘news’-media such as The Daily Beast portrayed him as being pro-Russian and even as being an enemy, even though he was neither but was just trying to keep Ukraine “neutral” or not hostile toward either America or his next-door-neighbor Russia. On 12 April 2010 Yanukovych met the U.S. President at the White House, to which Obama had invited him , but Yanukovych refused Obama’s suggestions that Ukraine join America’s alliance against Ukraine’s next-door neighbor Russia. On 2 July 2010, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Yanukovych held a joint press conference in Kiev, where she said
"We discussed ways that Ukraine and the United States can deepen and expand our strategic partnership, moving forward with the work of the U.S.-Ukraine Strategic Partnership Commission that I co-chair. … And the United States welcomes Ukrainian parliament's decision to approve foreign military exercises on Ukrainian territory in 2010 and we thank Ukraine and the Ukrainian people for your important contributions to NATO and other international security operations. … And as I said, we are grateful for Ukraine's contributions to NATO security efforts and other peacekeeping operations around the world. And we look forward to the joint U.S.-Ukraine military exercises. And we also support a relationship with Russia that is in Ukraine's interest that helps to further what President Obama has called the resetting of relations with Russia."
Back before the invasion and occupation of Iraq, Shachtman had been a lowly “Contributor” to a digital ‘news’ site “Tech Central Station,” which billed itself as “Where Free Markets Meet Technology” and this was actually a MIC (military-industrial complex, or U.S. ‘defense’ contractor financed) propaganda site. On 22 January 2003, two months before America invaded and destroyed Iraq, that ‘contributor’ headlined there, “Predator or Prey?” and opened: “Predator drones are the high-tech darlings of the new war. Too bad they're so slow, dumb, noisy, and near-sighted that almost anything stronger than a peashooter could take them down.” ‘Defense’ spending needs to be increased — that was the pitch. Otherwise, America’s drones could become the Taliban’s — and soon also Saddam’s — “prey.”
Tech Central Station’s top person was its Editor-in-Chief, Nick Schulz , who since at least 2014 , is with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is an overtly right-wing (no mealy-mouthed Democratic Party) proponent of extending the American empire to everywhere in the world.
National Review headlined The Daily Beast is owned by IAC Corporation, whose Chairman is the billionaire Barry Diller. On 7 January 2020, the Republican billionaires’ neoconservative magazineheadlined “Chelsea Clinton Made Millions on Boards Run by Clinton Mega-Donor” , and that was referring to the Democratic neoconservative Diller. (All billionaires are neocons — not a one of them donates to progressive candidates. And all progressives are against imperialism; that’s a core of progressivism. This is why progressive politics stands no chance in America: the billionaires always drown it aborning — not just in 2016 and 2020.)
Even “entertainment” news in America is often used in order to boost sales for corporations such as Lockheed Martin — America’s megacorporations whose main or only customer is the U.S. Government itself. For example, on the July 4th edition of NPR’s “All Things Considered” was a plug for a movie that aims to persuade viewers that America’s invading troops need more and better weapons; the movie is called “Outpost” and it’s filmed in Afghanistan. The interview (which is free MIC publicity that’s funded by NPR’s donors) had Sacha Pfeiffer interviewing its director, Rod Lurie. This was a skillful sales-pitch for the movie, and for the entire MIC that the movie promotes. It’s not enough that America’s Government already spends around half of the entire world’s annual military exenditures . More, more !! Conquest is costly. (Even when it fails to conquer.) And those billionaires want the public to spend even more to buy and upgrade the weaponry that these billionaires are selling to the U.S. Government and its allies.
In America and its allies, this is what’s called “capitalism,” and “the free market.” And “patriotism.” Just right for July 4th. Very ‘right’. Shoot those ‘Reds!’