Slapstick Suicide

With Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler cast as Laurel and Hardy , the Democratic Party entered the slapstick phase of its self-destruction , moving from one botched scheme to the next amidst a chaos of falling pianos , splintered two-by-fours , and crashed bi-planes .
The old 1930s screen comedies usually also featured a “ grand dame ” character making herself ridiculous , like Margaret Dumont in Duck Soup , and congressional central casting has fashioned just such a late-career role for Nancy Pelosi , all fluster and spleen , and well-supplied with comic props like the carefully pre-torn State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Tuesday night .
Can someone drop an anvil on her , please ?
You also had to love the costuming for the great occasion : the congressional Democratic ladies all decked out in white robes , like an angel choir from The Green Pastures , exuding virtue and chastity while they mugged for the cameras — as if they never turned a campaign contribution into a Cadillac Escalade or a vacation in Taormina .
Next year , perhaps , they ’ ll get rigged with wires and downy wings and fly around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ol ’ Pharoah Get Lost ” while the president splutters at the podium .
Living in the Long Eme ... James Howard Kunstler Buy New $ 24.95 That spectacle was immediately followed by the Keystone Kops Iowa caucus , which has not really been resolved three days later as I write , though 100 percent of the vote is supposedly counted ( cue , laughter ) .
Many of the reporting counties have fewer voters than the average Methodist college student body , and somehow it was hard to tally the numbers for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Perez called for a do-over .
That ’ ll sure have a ton of cred .
By the time it ’ s done , the action will have moved on from New Hampshire to Nevada , and Gawd knows what pratfalls await there ( in a state founded literally on bilking the credulous ) .
Considering they are now the official party of chaos , all of this colorful comic disorder may have a purpose behind it : to demonstrate that the United States is now too incompetent to hold an election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will have to be disputed .
Cue Lawfare , the Dem ’ s designated sedition generator .
They ’ ll step in and gum up the system with so much litigation that the ghost of Samuel J. Tilden will be heard screaming for mercy somewhere high above the capitol ’ s grand dome .
Unless , of course , the party manages to complete its drawn-out suicide at the Milwaukee convention .
The Iowa fiasco was universally seen as an effort to trip-up Bernie Sanders , the elderly Leninist who , ironically , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a colossal version of the very Iowa caucus that was engineered to thwart him .
It ’ s looking at this point like nobody will go into the convention with a chance to clinch the nomination and a dire battle will ensue .
Bernie has not forgotten the dirty that was done to him last time by Mrs. Clinton ’ s corps of flying monkey super-delegates .
Some of the young Bernie Broz in charge of this-and-that on the campaign have been recorded threatening violence and mayhem in the event of such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party may split up into two or more rump parties , a la the 1860 contest , and that will be the end of them .
The Geography of Nowhe ... James Howard Kunstler Best Price : $ 1.17 Buy New $ 11.88 Meanwhile , in case you have forgotten , scores of public officials from the Obama administration stand to be indicted as we enter the heart of the spring primary season .
On top of three failed seditious attempts to overthrow Mr. Trump since 2016 , a cavalcade of perp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the recognition among the battered true believers in the Holy Church of Maddow that a genuine coup d ’ état has been running for three solid years , whether or not you like Donald Trump .
They came close to turning the USA into a banana republic .
The news media is saying that President Trump had “ his best week ever.
” My sense of him hasn ’ t changed : he remains the Golden Golem of Greatness , a kind of mystical and mystifying comic figure himself , but not of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a character drawn from the neo-gothic Joker phase of American history — and , hey , he really did spring full-blown on the scene from our real-life Gotham City .
I was impressed , during his Thursday post-acquittal White House gala , at the stunning incoherence of his remarks , his facility for leaving absolutely every thought hanging unfinished in mid-sentence as he turned to the next uncompleted thought .
I can ’ t say for sure that this makes him an ineffective manager of the nation ’ s affairs , but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The fact remains , though , that his antagonists have behaved much worse , and now they are going to be punished .
The Best of James Howard Kunstler

With Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler cast as Laurel and Hardy, the Democratic Party entered the slapstick phase of its self-destruction, moving from one botched scheme to the next amidst a chaos of falling pianos, splintered two-by-fours, and crashed bi-planes. The old 1930s screen comedies usually also featured a “grand dame” character making herself ridiculous, like Margaret Dumont in Duck Soup, and congressional central casting has fashioned just such a late-career role for Nancy Pelosi, all fluster and spleen, and well-supplied with comic props like the carefully pre-torn State of the Union address she ceremoniously sundered on Tuesday night. Can someone drop an anvil on her, please?
You also had to love the costuming for the great occasion: the congressional Democratic ladies all decked out in white robes, like an angel choir from The Green Pastures, exuding virtue and chastity while they mugged for the cameras — as if they never turned a campaign contribution into a Cadillac Escalade or a vacation in Taormina. Next year, perhaps, they’ll get rigged with wires and downy wings and fly around the chamber singing “Didn’t Ol’ Pharoah Get Lost” while the president splutters at the podium.
Living in the Long Eme... James Howard Kunstler Buy New $24.95 (as of 10:56 UTC - Details) That spectacle was immediately followed by the Keystone Kops Iowa caucus, which has not really been resolved three days later as I write, though 100 percent of the vote is supposedly counted (cue, laughter). Many of the reporting counties have fewer voters than the average Methodist college student body, and somehow it was hard to tally the numbers for days on end? Party chairman Tom Perez called for a do-over. That’ll sure have a ton of cred. By the time it’s done, the action will have moved on from New Hampshire to Nevada, and Gawd knows what pratfalls await there (in a state founded literally on bilking the credulous).
Considering they are now the official party of chaos, all of this colorful comic disorder may have a purpose behind it: to demonstrate that the United States is now too incompetent to hold an election, and therefore whatever happens on November 3 will have to be disputed. Cue Lawfare, the Dem’s designated sedition generator. They’ll step in and gum up the system with so much litigation that the ghost of Samuel J. Tilden will be heard screaming for mercy somewhere high above the capitol’s grand dome.
Unless, of course, the party manages to complete its drawn-out suicide at the Milwaukee convention. The Iowa fiasco was universally seen as an effort to trip-up Bernie Sanders, the elderly Leninist who, ironically, seeks to turn the entire federal bureaucracy into a colossal version of the very Iowa caucus that was engineered to thwart him. It’s looking at this point like nobody will go into the convention with a chance to clinch the nomination and a dire battle will ensue. Bernie has not forgotten the dirty that was done to him last time by Mrs. Clinton’s corps of flying monkey super-delegates. Some of the young Bernie Broz in charge of this-and-that on the campaign have been recorded threatening violence and mayhem in the event of such a dirty replay. At best, the party may split up into two or more rump parties, a la the 1860 contest, and that will be the end of them.
The Geography of Nowhe... James Howard Kunstler Best Price: $1.17 Buy New $11.88 (as of 10:41 UTC - Details) Meanwhile, in case you have forgotten, scores of public officials from the Obama administration stand to be indicted as we enter the heart of the spring primary season. On top of three failed seditious attempts to overthrow Mr. Trump since 2016, a cavalcade of perp walks for all that may finally force the recognition among the battered true believers in the Holy Church of Maddow that a genuine coup d’état has been running for three solid years, whether or not you like Donald Trump. They came close to turning the USA into a banana republic.
The news media is saying that President Trump had “his best week ever.” My sense of him hasn’t changed: he remains the Golden Golem of Greatness, a kind of mystical and mystifying comic figure himself, but not of the 1930s slapstick sort, more like a character drawn from the neo-gothic Joker phase of American history — and, hey, he really did spring full-blown on the scene from our real-life Gotham City. I was impressed, during his Thursday post-acquittal White House gala, at the stunning incoherence of his remarks, his facility for leaving absolutely every thought hanging unfinished in mid-sentence as he turned to the next uncompleted thought. I can’t say for sure that this makes him an ineffective manager of the nation’s affairs, but it does leave you kind of wondering. The fact remains, though, that his antagonists have behaved much worse, and now they are going to be punished.
Reprinted with permission from Kunstler.com.
The Best of James Howard Kunstler


lewrockwell--2020-02-08--How State Open Borders Empower the Central Government

“ Open borders ” is a phrase usually heard in the context of international borders only .
We hear far less about the issue of open borders between member states within a confederation or union of states .
After all , no one thinks twice of crossing the borders between member states within the United States of America .
Increasingly , one is similarly unimpressed when crossing from one EU member state to another in Europe .
Often unnoticed is the way that disappearing borders between states have helped pave the way for advocates of ever greater consolidation of power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s a process that has taken decades—or even centuries in some cases—but it is real .
This process of centralization often proceeds in four steps : One : So long as there are internal border controls , each member state can control the flow of migrants , goods , and services .
Thus , if one state has legalized a dangerous substance or device , neighboring states can still stop those substances and devices at the member state ’ s border .
Similarly , if one state is believed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” migrants or fugitives , neighboring member states can respond by regulating the flow of persons into their own territories .
There is no need for a universal policy , because each member state is able to shield itself from the effects of policies in neighboring member states .
Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 Two : But some activists and lawmakers recognize there are benefits to open borders .
So , seeking greater ease in the movement of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some cases to transfer the cost of border enforcement to others—member states seek to minimize or abolish member-state borders as functioning borders .
Three : But this does not come without risks and externalities .
Without union-wide and uniform laws , it is then feared that “ bad actors ” and prohibited goods can easily cross from less regulated areas to more regulated ones .
Four : So a solution is proposed : the central government will assume the cost of border control , transferring border control activities to the new union-wide border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border , lawmakers seek union-wide uniform policies .
“ Bad actors ” are declared to be criminals in all jurisdictions and the “ dangerous ” substances and devices can now only legally enter by crossing international boundaries .
The central government is now expected to provide enforcement to maintain this new status quo .
What had once been the responsibility of the member states has been transferred to a newly empowered central government .
This process is now underway in Europe , where the EU government is moving closer to demanding “ harmonization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states within the open-border zone adopt more stringent gun control laws .
But for now , we ’ ll stick to examples in the United States : Cross-Border Travel as an Excuse for National Gun Control In the gun control debate , it has long been argued that the lack of state borders means a greater need for uniform nationwide gun control .
In an analysis from National Public Radio , for example , the author concludes that the high homicide rates in Washington , DC , and Chicago are partly to blame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to political scientist Philip Cook , the stringent gun laws in places like Chicago are “ only at best partially effective , because the borders are permeable.
” Were there not free movement from state to state , of course , it would be more difficult to argue that Wisconsin is to blame for Chicago ’ s homicide rate .
The argument by gun control advocates in this case follows a now familiar pattern : the presence of a relatively low amount of regulation in one member state ( i.e.
, Indiana @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surrounding member states , who then insist that open borders between states mean that low-regulation states must change their policies to match the high-regulation states .
Up until the late nineteenth century , immigration control had been regarded as a state matter .
States heavily impacted by immigration—especially New York and Massachusetts—had imposed a variety of laws restricting the movement of immigrant paupers and requiring that bonds be paid on new immigrants to ensure that they did not become a burden on public funds .
As late as the 1870s , bills aimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majorities in Congress .
Part of the reason that there was a lack of a national consensus was that views of immigrants nationwide were hardly uniform .
Some frontier states actively sought immigrants in order to increase the development of farmland and increase state populations .
Moreover , in 1897 , President Cleveland vetoed legislation attempting to further restrict immigration on the grounds that many states and territories of the US—especially those bordering Canada , which provided migrant labor to American farmers—benefited from the free movement of migrants .
Cleveland noted that these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and especial interests which in many cases make an interchange of labor between their people and their alien neighbors most important.
” Nevertheless , anti-immigrant forces had increasingly lobbied for greater federal controls in part to counter the assumed threat of free movement of migrants from some states to others .
Thus in 1876 , the US Supreme Court ruled that it was necessary to provide “ a system of laws in this matter applicable to all ports and all vessels ” in order to settle a long-standing “ matter of contest and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the state and local origins of immigration policy were all but forgotten .
Regulating guns and migrants haven ’ t been the only excuses given for expanding federal power in the name of national uniformity .
Centralized control was also deemed to be necessary in order to control the transport and manufacture of alcoholic beverages .
In the years leading up to the adoption of nationwide prohibition , all but sixteen states had adopted their own versions of prohibition .
For the moralists , however , this wasn ’ t enough .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with large numbers of Catholics and ethnic Germans—offered a haven to residents of “ dry ” states , who could easily cross over into the “ wet ” states .
Even worse , people could illegally import alcohol into dry states from wet ones with relative ease .
By imposing nationwide prohibition on everyone , however , access to alcohol could be more easily attacked .
We see similar issues today as some states have begun to legalize recreational marijuana much to the dismay of officials in neighboring states .
Once again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federalization of policy and the abolition of local prerogatives .
In 2014 , two marijuana prohibitionist states , Oklahoma and Nebraska , unsuccessfully sued Colorado in response to its legalization of recreational marijuana .
The two states were concerned that the lack of a patrolled border between Colorado and its neighbors was an unacceptable threat to the public in prohibitionist states .
Thus , the two states petitioned the court to declare state law null and void and to rule that federal law reigns supreme in matters of drug prohibition .
Fortunately , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have not yet decided to declare federal law supreme , as they have many times before .
How Open Borders Are Used and Abused Often the ideological motivation behind open borders among member states of a political union is admirable .
Among the creators of both the United States and the European Union , for instance , it appears that at least some of them were motivated by a desire to increase the free flow of people and goods for the economic and cultural betterment of all .
There is no danger in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controls unilaterally .
The problem only comes in when there is a general government—such as the US federal government or the European Commission—to impose uniformity of law .
Unfortunately , economic integration between member states in the US did not come organically or unilaterally .
It was imposed from above , so that low-regulation states would not be an inconvenience to high-regulation states .
We have seen this with alcohol , with migrants , and with guns .
In all cases , the removal of internal barriers between member states has provided the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulation on other members .
This can only be carried out , however , when there is a strong enough central government in place .
Since at least the late nineteenth century in the US , this has clearly been the case .
The Irrepressible Roth ... Murray N. Rothbard Best Price : $ 18.03 Buy New $ 18.09 Experience now suggests that these sorts of open borders really only work under certain conditions : 1 ) border controls are decreased unilaterally by each member state in an ad hoc and decentralized manner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too weak to impose uniform nationwide laws without widespread consensus .
3 ) Member states bring to the table a significant amount of tolerance for their neighbors , and for the fact that people might do things differently in other places .
In decades past , for instance , it was simply accepted by most that some places have stringent gun laws and other places don ’ t .
In the minds of many policymakers , this created certain risks and externalities , but these were tolerated in light of the ideological notion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ought to be regulated from the center .
It is not longer clear , however , that we live in a political environment where this sort of tolerance or decentralization is still valued .
It now appears that a lack of functioning borders between member states—instead of promoting unity and cooperation—may actually be promoting conflict .
For example , were there a patrolled border between California and the rest of the United States it is unlikely that the rest of the nation would regard immigration into the United States to be close to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Similarly , if it were not so easy to travel unobstructed from gun-friendly Indiana to gun prohibitionist Chicago , we wouldn ’ t be hearing about how we need federal action on gun control .
As results from political centralization in general , the lack of physical separation between states in the US has increased the stakes of who controls the central government and influences its policymakers .
In the long term , the attempt at building unity through the abolition of borders may ironically lead to greater regional conflict .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political actors—i.e.
, voting—even without moving from state to state .
They can affect national politics as voters in the same state that their port of entry is in .
It is likely that many would then oppose immigration of this sort even if state-to-state borders were closed , and if all states were part of a single national political jurisdiction .
This issue , however , can be addressed through naturalization laws rather than immigration controls .
See https : //mises.org/wire/dont-confuse-immigration-naturalization The Best of Ryan McMaken

“Open borders” is a phrase usually heard in the context of international borders only.
We hear far less about the issue of open borders between member states within a confederation or union of states.
After all, no one thinks twice of crossing the borders between member states within the United States of America. Increasingly, one is similarly unimpressed when crossing from one EU member state to another in Europe.
Often unnoticed is the way that disappearing borders between states have helped pave the way for advocates of ever greater consolidation of power in the hands of the central government.
It’s a process that has taken decades—or even centuries in some cases—but it is real.
This process of centralization often proceeds in four steps:
One: So long as there are internal border controls, each member state can control the flow of migrants, goods, and services. Thus, if one state has legalized a dangerous substance or device, neighboring states can still stop those substances and devices at the member state’s border. Similarly, if one state is believed to be fostering the inflow of “undesirable” migrants or fugitives, neighboring member states can respond by regulating the flow of persons into their own territories. There is no need for a universal policy, because each member state is able to shield itself from the effects of policies in neighboring member states. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
Two: But some activists and lawmakers recognize there are benefits to open borders. So, seeking greater ease in the movement of goods, capital, and workers—and in some cases to transfer the cost of border enforcement to others—member states seek to minimize or abolish member-state borders as functioning borders.
Three: But this does not come without risks and externalities. Without union-wide and uniform laws, it is then feared that “bad actors” and prohibited goods can easily cross from less regulated areas to more regulated ones.
Four: So a solution is proposed: the central government will assume the cost of border control, transferring border control activities to the new union-wide border encompassing all member states. Within this border, lawmakers seek union-wide uniform policies. “Bad actors” are declared to be criminals in all jurisdictions and the “dangerous” substances and devices can now only legally enter by crossing international boundaries. The central government is now expected to provide enforcement to maintain this new status quo. What had once been the responsibility of the member states has been transferred to a newly empowered central government.
This process is now underway in Europe, where the EU government is moving closer to demanding “harmonization” of tax rates and that all states within the open-border zone adopt more stringent gun control laws. But for now, we’ll stick to examples in the United States:
Cross-Border Travel as an Excuse for National Gun Control
In the gun control debate, it has long been argued that the lack of state borders means a greater need for uniform nationwide gun control. In an analysis from National Public Radio, for example, the author concludes that the high homicide rates in Washington, DC, and Chicago are partly to blame on gun laws in neighboring states. According to political scientist Philip Cook, the stringent gun laws in places like Chicago are “only at best partially effective, because the borders are permeable.”
Were there not free movement from state to state, of course, it would be more difficult to argue that Wisconsin is to blame for Chicago’s homicide rate.
The argument by gun control advocates in this case follows a now familiar pattern: the presence of a relatively low amount of regulation in one member state (i.e., Indiana) is viewed as a threat to surrounding member states, who then insist that open borders between states mean that low-regulation states must change their policies to match the high-regulation states.
The Federalization of Immigration
Up until the late nineteenth century, immigration control had been regarded as a state matter. States heavily impacted by immigration—especially New York and Massachusetts—had imposed a variety of laws restricting the movement of immigrant paupers and requiring that bonds be paid on new immigrants to ensure that they did not become a burden on public funds. As late as the 1870s, bills aimed at federalizing immigration policy were killed by majorities in Congress.
Part of the reason that there was a lack of a national consensus was that views of immigrants nationwide were hardly uniform. Some frontier states actively sought immigrants in order to increase the development of farmland and increase state populations. Moreover, in 1897, President Cleveland vetoed legislation attempting to further restrict immigration on the grounds that many states and territories of the US—especially those bordering Canada, which provided migrant labor to American farmers—benefited from the free movement of migrants. Cleveland noted that these parts of the country “have separate and especial interests which in many cases make an interchange of labor between their people and their alien neighbors most important.”
Nevertheless, anti-immigrant forces had increasingly lobbied for greater federal controls in part to counter the assumed threat of free movement of migrants from some states to others. Thus in 1876, the US Supreme Court ruled that it was necessary to provide “a system of laws in this matter applicable to all ports and all vessels” in order to settle a long-standing “matter of contest and complaint.” By the early twentieth century, the state and local origins of immigration policy were all but forgotten.
Prohibition and the Drug War
Regulating guns and migrants haven’t been the only excuses given for expanding federal power in the name of national uniformity. Centralized control was also deemed to be necessary in order to control the transport and manufacture of alcoholic beverages. In the years leading up to the adoption of nationwide prohibition, all but sixteen states had adopted their own versions of prohibition. For the moralists, however, this wasn’t enough. Those states where alcohol remained legal—mostly states with large numbers of Catholics and ethnic Germans—offered a haven to residents of “dry” states, who could easily cross over into the “wet” states. Even worse, people could illegally import alcohol into dry states from wet ones with relative ease. By imposing nationwide prohibition on everyone, however, access to alcohol could be more easily attacked.
We see similar issues today as some states have begun to legalize recreational marijuana much to the dismay of officials in neighboring states. Once again, the answer is alleged to be the federalization of policy and the abolition of local prerogatives. In 2014, two marijuana prohibitionist states, Oklahoma and Nebraska, unsuccessfully sued Colorado in response to its legalization of recreational marijuana. The two states were concerned that the lack of a patrolled border between Colorado and its neighbors was an unacceptable threat to the public in prohibitionist states. Thus, the two states petitioned the court to declare state law null and void and to rule that federal law reigns supreme in matters of drug prohibition. Fortunately, on this particular issue the federal courts have not yet decided to declare federal law supreme, as they have many times before.
How Open Borders Are Used and Abused
Often the ideological motivation behind open borders among member states of a political union is admirable. Among the creators of both the United States and the European Union, for instance, it appears that at least some of them were motivated by a desire to increase the free flow of people and goods for the economic and cultural betterment of all.
There is no danger in individual states lowering trade barriers or border controls unilaterally. The problem only comes in when there is a general government—such as the US federal government or the European Commission—to impose uniformity of law.
Unfortunately, economic integration between member states in the US did not come organically or unilaterally. It was imposed from above, so that low-regulation states would not be an inconvenience to high-regulation states. We have seen this with alcohol, with migrants, and with guns.
In all cases, the removal of internal barriers between member states has provided the impetus for some members to demand more regulation on other members. This can only be carried out, however, when there is a strong enough central government in place. Since at least the late nineteenth century in the US, this has clearly been the case.
The Irrepressible Roth... Rothbard, Murray N. Best Price: $19.51 Buy New $17.00 (as of 04:07 UTC - Details) Experience now suggests that these sorts of open borders really only work under certain conditions: 1) border controls are decreased unilaterally by each member state in an ad hoc and decentralized manner. 2) The central government is too weak to impose uniform nationwide laws without widespread consensus. 3) Member states bring to the table a significant amount of tolerance for their neighbors, and for the fact that people might do things differently in other places. In decades past, for instance, it was simply accepted by most that some places have stringent gun laws and other places don’t. In the minds of many policymakers, this created certain risks and externalities, but these were tolerated in light of the ideological notion that not every aspect of daily life ought to be regulated from the center.
It is not longer clear, however, that we live in a political environment where this sort of tolerance or decentralization is still valued. It now appears that a lack of functioning borders between member states—instead of promoting unity and cooperation—may actually be promoting conflict. For example, were there a patrolled border between California and the rest of the United States it is unlikely that the rest of the nation would regard immigration into the United States to be close to the high-stakes political issue it now is. Similarly, if it were not so easy to travel unobstructed from gun-friendly Indiana to gun prohibitionist Chicago, we wouldn’t be hearing about how we need federal action on gun control.
As results from political centralization in general, the lack of physical separation between states in the US has increased the stakes of who controls the central government and influences its policymakers. In the long term, the attempt at building unity through the abolition of borders may ironically lead to greater regional conflict.
—
There is an additional problem of immigrants becoming political actors—i.e., voting—even without moving from state to state. They can affect national politics as voters in the same state that their port of entry is in. It is likely that many would then oppose immigration of this sort even if state-to-state borders were closed, and if all states were part of a single national political jurisdiction. This issue, however, can be addressed through naturalization laws rather than immigration controls. See https://mises.org/wire/dont-confuse-immigration-naturalization
The Best of Ryan McMaken


lewrockwell--2020-02-08--German TV Exposes the Lies That Entrapped Julian Assange

A major German TV network has aired an interview with the UN rapporteur on torture that reveals the invention of the Swedish “ rape ” case against Julian Assange .
Truth has broken through for those confused about how a publisher ended up in a maximum security prison in London with a one-way extradition ticket to court in the U.S. and the rest of his life behind bars .
One of the main German TV channels ( ZDF ) ran two prime-time segments on Wednesday night exposing authorities in Sweden for having “ made up ” the story about Julian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night most Germans , as well as other consumers of “ major media ” in Europe , had no idea of the trickery that enmeshed Assange in a spider-web almost certainly designed by the U.S. and woven by accomplices in vassal states like Sweden , Britain and , eventually , Ecuador .
ZDF punctured that web by interviewing UN Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer .
One ZDF “ Heute Sendung ” segment ( in German ) is especially telling from minute 13:00 to 15:30 .
The second is ZDF “ Heute Journal ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cypherpunks : Freedom a ... Julian Assange Best Price : $ 3.45 Buy New $ 8.99 Both ZDF programs show Melzer being interviewed , with minimal interruption or commentary , letting his findings speak for themselves about how allegations against Assange were “ made up ” and manipulated to hold him captive .
The particularly scurrilous allegation that led many , including initially Melzer , to believe Assange was a rapist — a tried and tested smear technique of covert action — was especially effective .
The Swedes never formally charged him with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for that matter .
ZDF exhibited some of the documents Melzer uncovered that show the sexual allegations were just as “ invented ” as the evidence for WMD before the attack on Iraq .
Melzer had previously admitted to having been so misled by media portrayals of Assange that he was initially reluctant to investigate Assange ’ s case .
Here is what Melzer wrote last year in an op-ed marking the International Day in Support of Torture Victims , June 26 .
No major media would print or post it .
Medium.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Torture of Julian Assange.
” “ But surely , I found myself pleading , Assange must be a selfish narcissist , skateboarding through the Ecuadorian Embassy and smearing feces on the walls ?
Well , all I heard from Embassy staff is that the inevitable inconveniences of his accommodation at their offices were handled with mutual respect and consideration .
This changed only after the election of President Moreno , when they were suddenly instructed to find smears against Assange and , when they didn ’ t , they were soon replaced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself to bless the world with his gossip , and to personally strip Assange of his asylum and citizenship without any due process of law .
In the end it finally dawned on me that I had been blinded by propaganda , and that Assange had been systematically slandered to divert attention from the crimes he exposed.
” ( Emphasis added . )
Melzer ended his op-ed with this somber warning : The WikiLeaks Files : T ... WikiLeaks Best Price : $ 4.18 Buy New $ 6.95 “ … This is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preventing a precedent likely to seal the fate of Western democracy .
For once telling the truth has become a crime , while the powerful enjoy impunity , it will be too late to correct the course .
We will have surrendered our voice to censorship and our fate to unrestrained tyranny.
” ( Emphasis added . )
Melzer ’ s indefatigable efforts to expose what Assange has gone through , including “ psychological torture , ” met with some modest success in the days before the German ZDF aired their stories .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ far the best interview of Melzer on Assange .
Opposition to extraditing Assange to the U.S. is becoming more widespread .
Another straw in an Assange-favorable wind came last week when the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe ( PACE ) called for Assange ’ s immediate release , ending years of silence by such European institutions .
It remains , nonetheless , an uphill struggle to prompt the British to think back 800 years to the courage of the nobles who wrested the Magna Carta from King John .
The views @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News .

A major German TV network has aired an interview with the UN rapporteur on torture that reveals the invention of the Swedish “rape” case against Julian Assange.
Truth has broken through for those confused about how a publisher ended up in a maximum security prison in London with a one-way extradition ticket to court in the U.S. and the rest of his life behind bars.
One of the main German TV channels (ZDF) ran two prime-time segments on Wednesday night exposing authorities in Sweden for having “made up” the story about Julian Assange being a rapist.
Until last night most Germans, as well as other consumers of “major media” in Europe, had no idea of the trickery that enmeshed Assange in a spider-web almost certainly designed by the U.S. and woven by accomplices in vassal states like Sweden, Britain and, eventually, Ecuador.
ZDF punctured that web by interviewing UN Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer. One ZDF “Heute Sendung” segment (in German) is especially telling from minute 13:00 to 15:30 . The second is ZDF “Heute Journal” (minute 25:49 to 30:19.) Cypherpunks: Freedom a... Julian Assange Best Price: $3.45 Buy New $8.99 (as of 08:30 UTC - Details)
Both ZDF programs show Melzer being interviewed, with minimal interruption or commentary, letting his findings speak for themselves about how allegations against Assange were “made up” and manipulated to hold him captive.
The particularly scurrilous allegation that led many, including initially Melzer, to believe Assange was a rapist — a tried and tested smear technique of covert action — was especially effective. The Swedes never formally charged him with rape — or with any crime, for that matter. ZDF exhibited some of the documents Melzer uncovered that show the sexual allegations were just as “invented” as the evidence for WMD before the attack on Iraq.
Melzer had previously admitted to having been so misled by media portrayals of Assange that he was initially reluctant to investigate Assange’s case. Here is what Melzer wrote last year in an op-ed marking the International Day in Support of Torture Victims, June 26.
No major media would print or post it. Medium.com posted it under the title “Demasking the Torture of Julian Assange.”
Excerpts:
“But surely, I found myself pleading, Assange must be a selfish narcissist, skateboarding through the Ecuadorian Embassy and smearing feces on the walls? Well, all I heard from Embassy staff is that the inevitable inconveniences of his accommodation at their offices were handled with mutual respect and consideration. This changed only after the election of President Moreno, when they were suddenly instructed to find smears against Assange and, when they didn’t, they were soon replaced. The President even took it upon himself to bless the world with his gossip, and to personally strip Assange of his asylum and citizenship without any due process of law. In the end it finally dawned on me that I had been blinded by propaganda, and that Assange had been systematically slandered to divert attention from the crimes he exposed.” (Emphasis added.)
Melzer ended his op-ed with this somber warning: The WikiLeaks Files: T... WikiLeaks Best Price: $4.18 Buy New $6.95 (as of 06:20 UTC - Details)
“… This is not only about protecting Assange, but about preventing a precedent likely to seal the fate of Western democracy. For once telling the truth has become a crime, while the powerful enjoy impunity, it will be too late to correct the course. We will have surrendered our voice to censorship and our fate to unrestrained tyranny.” (Emphasis added.)
Melzer’s indefatigable efforts to expose what Assange has gone through, including “psychological torture,” met with some modest success in the days before the German ZDF aired their stories. Embedded in the linked article is by far the best interview of Melzer on Assange.
Opposition to extraditing Assange to the U.S. is becoming more widespread. Another straw in an Assange-favorable wind came last week when the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) called for Assange’s immediate release, ending years of silence by such European institutions.
It remains, nonetheless, an uphill struggle to prompt the British to think back 800 years to the courage of the nobles who wrested the Magna Carta from King John.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Reprinted with the author’s permission.


lewrockwell--2020-02-08--The Making of Trans Children

The Making of Trans Children

Should schools have gender-neutral uniforms ?
Should tampons be available in the boys ’ toilets for pupils who were born female but now identify as male ?
Which changing room should transgender pupils use after PE lessons ?
Should parents be informed if their daughter asks to be treated as a boy at school ?
Should transgender children be prescribed hormones to delay the onset of puberty ?
Discussion about the treatment of transgender people often focuses on the experiences of children .
In part , this is because it is down to adults to determine what is in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what is best for transgender children is fiercely contested .
But it is also because transgender activists make children the focus of campaigns , television programmes and teaching materials .
Children serve as a useful moral shield for transgender activists , deflecting questions and criticism .
The very existence of trans children lends support to their claim that people are born with a sense of gender identity , that sometimes a male brain develops in a female body and vice versa .
The figure of the trans child , now ingrained in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if transgender people have always existed .
This , in turn , lends further weight to the argument that being transgender is an innate characteristic .
Inventing Transgender Children and Young People , a new book edited by Michele Moore and Heather Brunskell-Evans , shatters each of the convenient myths that have built up around the transgender child .
Inventing Transgender Children includes contributions from academics , psychiatrists and parents , as well as young adults who transitioned as children but are now questioning the process they underwent .
Together , they show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality , transgenderism is an entirely invented concept with no basis in neuroscience , psychology or psychiatry .
They argue that there is little evidence to support claims that brains are sexed , and no evidence whatsoever to suggest that some fetuses develop with mismatched brains and bodies .
In fact , they note , ‘ The idea that transgenderism is an internal , pre-social phenomenon that has existed throughout history is not an evidenced fact , but a proposition ’ .
And far from being a long-standing proposition , it was only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the transgender child became widely accepted .
One contributor locates the invention of transgenderism within the medical profession : ‘ It became possible to conceptualise “ gender identity ” as dislocated from biological sex when new medical technologies for the first time made it possible for doctors to change the bodies of those born with indeterminate genitals and to assign them to a sex.
’ In this way , he argues , ‘ the availability of the treatment appears to have essentially created the demand ’ .
When it comes to children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distinct transgender identities over a 30-year period .
The first , she suggests , ‘ is that of the unfortunate victim “ born in the wrong body ” ‘ , while ‘ the second is that of the revolutionary adolescent who bravely sensitises the older generation , including trained clinicians , to the subtleties , complexities and politics of gender ’ .
These two distinct identities , victim and revolutionary , increasingly merge to form ‘ the transgender child ’ , promoted by charities , present on YouTube and taught as part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially children who are both victims and revolutionaries , may be useful for transgender activists intent on promoting their own ideology .
But , as the contributors to Inventing Transgender Children make clear , it has devastating consequences for children , who are not only exploited by activists , but also by some teachers , doctors , social workers and psychiatrists – the very people meant to protect them from harm .

Should schools have gender-neutral uniforms? Should tampons be available in the boys’ toilets for pupils who were born female but now identify as male? Which changing room should transgender pupils use after PE lessons? Should parents be informed if their daughter asks to be treated as a boy at school? Should transgender children be prescribed hormones to delay the onset of puberty?
Discussion about the treatment of transgender people often focuses on the experiences of children. In part, this is because it is down to adults to determine what is in a child’s best interests, and what is best for transgender children is fiercely contested. But it is also because transgender activists make children the focus of campaigns, television programmes and teaching materials.
Children serve as a useful moral shield for transgender activists, deflecting questions and criticism. The very existence of trans children lends support to their claim that people are born with a sense of gender identity, that sometimes a male brain develops in a female body and vice versa. The figure of the trans child, now ingrained in the popular imagination, makes it seem as if transgender people have always existed. This, in turn, lends further weight to the argument that being transgender is an innate characteristic. Inventing Transgender Children and Young People, a new book edited by Michele Moore and Heather Brunskell-Evans, shatters each of the convenient myths that have built up around the transgender child.
Inventing the transgender child
Inventing Transgender Children includes contributions from academics, psychiatrists and parents, as well as young adults who transitioned as children but are now questioning the process they underwent. Together, they show that far from being an ever-present biological reality, transgenderism is an entirely invented concept with no basis in neuroscience, psychology or psychiatry. They argue that there is little evidence to support claims that brains are sexed, and no evidence whatsoever to suggest that some fetuses develop with mismatched brains and bodies. In fact, they note, ‘The idea that transgenderism is an internal, pre-social phenomenon that has existed throughout history is not an evidenced fact, but a proposition’. And far from being a long-standing proposition, it was only around five years ago that the existence of the transgender child became widely accepted.
One contributor locates the invention of transgenderism within the medical profession: ‘It became possible to conceptualise “gender identity” as dislocated from biological sex when new medical technologies for the first time made it possible for doctors to change the bodies of those born with indeterminate genitals and to assign them to a sex.’ In this way, he argues, ‘the availability of the treatment appears to have essentially created the demand’.
When it comes to children, Brunskell-Evans traces the formation of two distinct transgender identities over a 30-year period. The first, she suggests, ‘is that of the unfortunate victim “born in the wrong body”‘, while ‘the second is that of the revolutionary adolescent who bravely sensitises the older generation, including trained clinicians, to the subtleties, complexities and politics of gender’. These two distinct identities, victim and revolutionary, increasingly merge to form ‘the transgender child’, promoted by charities, present on YouTube and taught as part of the school curriculum.
Hiding behind children, especially children who are both victims and revolutionaries, may be useful for transgender activists intent on promoting their own ideology. But, as the contributors to Inventing Transgender Children make clear, it has devastating consequences for children, who are not only exploited by activists, but also by some teachers, doctors, social workers and psychiatrists – the very people meant to protect them from harm.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-02-08--Are the Bells Tolling for Amy, Liz, & Joe?

By the end of February , the race for the Democratic nomination may have come down to a choice of one of three white men .
Two are well into their 70s , and either would be the oldest president ever inaugurated .
The third is a 38-year-old gay in a same-sex marriage who would be our youngest president ever .
How is it possible , if not probable , that Bernie Sanders , Michael Bloomberg and Pete Buttigieg will be the last three Democrats standing ?
Consider what the Iowa caucuses produced — after the Democrats figured out how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ popular vote on both the first and second ballots .
As of Thursday , with 547 state delegates , he was only three shy of Buttigieg ’ s total .
And the caucus yet to report is in Sanders country .
The Death of the West : ... Patrick J. Buchanan Check Amazon for Pricing .
By week ’ s end , Sanders could be the declared winner of Iowa .
And though he was denied the bounce he would have gotten if that news had been posted Monday night , Sanders raised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running a clear first in the latest New Hampshire polls .
If Sanders , with cash on hand unmatched by any rival , save billionaire Bloomberg , wins the Granite State , he becomes the progressives ’ champion over rival Elizabeth Warren and is in the race all the way to the convention .
Consider the prospects of Mayor Pete .
Even before the first returns were reported in Iowa , he declared his campaign “ victorious ” and left for New Hampshire .
By Wednesday , after two-thirds of the ballots had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won the battle for delegates .
By Thursday , in the latest polls of New Hampshire , Buttigieg had vaulted into second place .
As of now , it looks like a Buttigieg-Sanders race in New Hampshire on Tuesday , with the big losers from Iowa — Warren , Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar — the big losers again .
If the trends do not change and polls do not shift over the weekend , former Vice President Joe Biden appears headed for another “ gut punch ” like the one he says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not get up off the canvas after this one .
Thursday , the Boston Globe/Suffolk and WHDH/Emerson polls both showed Sanders beating Biden like a drum , better than two-to-one .
Moreover , Biden ’ s fundraising has fallen off , and it is unlikely major donors are going to send cash to a candidate who just ran fourth in Iowa and could run fourth or fifth in New Hampshire .
Buttigieg is the candidate whose stock is rising .
He has surged to second place , just six points and 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Hampshire polls , while Biden is lagging a distant 13 and 19 points behind Sanders .
Now , consider Klobuchar .
As a senator from Minnesota , she was expected to do well , indeed , her personal best , in the neighboring state of Iowa .
She ran fifth .
And though she has the endorsement of the leading newspaper in New Hampshire , the Union-Leader , she , too , is trailing Sanders in the latest polls by more than three-to-one .
If Klobuchar runs fifth in Iowa and third @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in what state does she win her first primary ?
And as her fundraising has never matched that of the front-runners , where does she get the money to match Sanders or Bloomberg on Super Tuesday , now just three weeks off ?
Klobuchar is now in the second tier in New Hampshire , behind Sanders and Buttigieg , but right alongside Biden and Warren .
A third- , fourth- or fifth-place finish would be near-fatal for them all .
As for Warren , in her battle with Sanders to emerge as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party , her third-place finish in Iowa , and her expected third-place finish in New Hampshire , at best , would seem to settle that issue for this election .
Churchill , Hitler , and ... Patrick J. Buchanan Best Price : $ 9.48 Buy New $ 14.00 Sanders beat Warren in Iowa , raised far more money in January than she did , and is now beating her two-and-three-to one in the New Hampshire polls .
So , again , the same question is raised .
Is what state does Elizabeth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are two more lingering questions .
If Biden is thrashed in New Hampshire on Tuesday , as he was in Iowa , does he remain viable in South Carolina , where he was so strong before the New Year ?
Will African American voters in South Carolina stick by Biden and his claim to be “ the most electable ” Democrat if he has been floored twice by Sanders and by Buttigieg , and can ’ t seem to win within his own party ?
What I wrote before Iowa seems even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beat Biden two or three times in the first four primary states in February , the last remaining roadblock on Bernie ’ s path to the nomination could be Mike Bloomberg ’ s billions.
” The Socialist vs .
The Billionaire .
Could either really beat The Donald ?
The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan

Shop all books by Pat Buchanan
By the end of February, the race for the Democratic nomination may have come down to a choice of one of three white men.
Two are well into their 70s, and either would be the oldest president ever inaugurated. The third is a 38-year-old gay in a same-sex marriage who would be our youngest president ever.
How is it possible, if not probable, that Bernie Sanders, Michael Bloomberg and Pete Buttigieg will be the last three Democrats standing?
Consider what the Iowa caucuses produced — after the Democrats figured out how to count votes.
Sanders won the popular vote on both the first and second ballots. As of Thursday, with 547 state delegates, he was only three shy of Buttigieg’s total. And the caucus yet to report is in Sanders country.
By week’s end, Sanders could be the declared winner of Iowa. And though he was denied the bounce he would have gotten if that news had been posted Monday night, Sanders raised $25 million in January and is running a clear first in the latest New Hampshire polls.
If Sanders, with cash on hand unmatched by any rival, save billionaire Bloomberg, wins the Granite State, he becomes the progressives’ champion over rival Elizabeth Warren and is in the race all the way to the convention.
Consider the prospects of Mayor Pete.
Even before the first returns were reported in Iowa, he declared his campaign “victorious” and left for New Hampshire. By Wednesday, after two-thirds of the ballots had been counted, he appeared to have won the battle for delegates.
By Thursday, in the latest polls of New Hampshire, Buttigieg had vaulted into second place. As of now, it looks like a Buttigieg-Sanders race in New Hampshire on Tuesday, with the big losers from Iowa — Warren, Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar — the big losers again.
If the trends do not change and polls do not shift over the weekend, former Vice President Joe Biden appears headed for another “gut punch” like the one he says he suffered in Iowa.
And Biden may not get up off the canvas after this one.
Thursday, the Boston Globe/Suffolk and WHDH/Emerson polls both showed Sanders beating Biden like a drum, better than two-to-one.
Moreover, Biden’s fundraising has fallen off, and it is unlikely major donors are going to send cash to a candidate who just ran fourth in Iowa and could run fourth or fifth in New Hampshire.
Buttigieg is the candidate whose stock is rising. He has surged to second place, just six points and 10 points behind Sanders in the two latest New Hampshire polls, while Biden is lagging a distant 13 and 19 points behind Sanders.
Now, consider Klobuchar. As a senator from Minnesota, she was expected to do well, indeed, her personal best, in the neighboring state of Iowa. She ran fifth. And though she has the endorsement of the leading newspaper in New Hampshire, the Union-Leader, she, too, is trailing Sanders in the latest polls by more than three-to-one.
If Klobuchar runs fifth in Iowa and third, fourth or fifth in New Hampshire, in what state does she win her first primary? And as her fundraising has never matched that of the front-runners, where does she get the money to match Sanders or Bloomberg on Super Tuesday, now just three weeks off?
Klobuchar is now in the second tier in New Hampshire, behind Sanders and Buttigieg, but right alongside Biden and Warren. A third-, fourth- or fifth-place finish would be near-fatal for them all.
As for Warren, in her battle with Sanders to emerge as the champion of the progressive wing of the party, her third-place finish in Iowa, and her expected third-place finish in New Hampshire, at best, would seem to settle that issue for this election. Churchill, Hitler, and... Patrick J. Buchanan Best Price: $9.48 Buy New $14.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
Sanders beat Warren in Iowa, raised far more money in January than she did, and is now beating her two-and-three-to one in the New Hampshire polls.
So, again, the same question is raised. Is what state does Elizabeth Warren beat her progressive rival?
There are two more lingering questions.
If Biden is thrashed in New Hampshire on Tuesday, as he was in Iowa, does he remain viable in South Carolina, where he was so strong before the New Year?
Will African American voters in South Carolina stick by Biden and his claim to be “the most electable” Democrat if he has been floored twice by Sanders and by Buttigieg, and can’t seem to win within his own party?
What I wrote before Iowa seems even more true today:
“If Bernie can beat Biden two or three times in the first four primary states in February, the last remaining roadblock on Bernie’s path to the nomination could be Mike Bloomberg’s billions.”
The Socialist vs. The Billionaire. Could either really beat The Donald?
The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan


lewrockwell--2020-02-08--Schizophrenia Causes More Marijuana Use

Schizophrenia Causes More Marijuana Use

Prohibitionists often cite the correlation between marijuana and schizophrenia as reason to oppose liberalization .
However , correlation is not causation , and people with schizophrenia also use other psychoactive substances more than the general population .
[ 1 ] So another possibility is that liability for schizophrenia causes a predisposition to use psychoactive substances .
And that is exactly what studies that can determine causal relations find to be the best explanation for the marijuana-schizophrenia correlation .
This video reviews the MR studies examining causality between marijuana and schizophrenia .
Mendelian randomization ( MR ) is a method used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ genetic liabilities and risk factors .
In this case , the genetic liability is for schizophrenia and the risk factor is marijuana use .
Because MR studies can determine causal relations , they are superior to the observational studies reporting a correlation between marijuana use and schizophrenia .
Yet the MR studies on marijuana and schizophrenia get very little press compared to the less informative observational studies .
The Medical Marijuana ... Laurie Wolf , Mary Wolf Best Price : $ 10.63 Buy New $ 12.43 To date , there are three MR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marijuana and schizophrenia .
As seen in the video above , the evidence strongly supports liability for schizophrenia causing an increased likelihood of marijuana smoking .
In contrast , evidence for marijuana causing schizophrenia is weak and uncertain , with weaker evidence that marijuana might actually decrease the risk of schizophrenia .
With strong evidence indicating that liability for schizophrenia causes an increased likelihood of marijuana use versus weak evidence for the reverse direction of causation , we have a best explanation for the correlation between marijuana and schizophrenia , an explanation that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ 1 ] Khokhar et al ( 2018 ) : “ 47 % of patients with schizophrenia have serious problems with drug or alcohol use during their lifetime compared to 16 % of the general population .
Regarding specific substances : tobacco , alcohol , cannabis and cocaine use disorders occur commonly in patients with schizophrenia.
” [ 2 ] Gage et al ( 2017 ) .
“ Assessing causality in associations between cannabis use and schizophrenia risk : a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.
” [ 3 ] Vaucher et al ( 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of schizophrenia : a Mendelian randomization study.
” [ 4 ] Pasman et al ( 2018 ) .
“ GWAS of lifetime cannabis use reveals new risk loci , genetic overlap with psychiatric traits , and a causal influence of schizophrenia.
” The Best of Ian Williams Goddard

Prohibitionists often cite the correlation between marijuana and schizophrenia as reason to oppose liberalization. However, correlation is not causation, and people with schizophrenia also use other psychoactive substances more than the general population. [1] So another possibility is that liability for schizophrenia causes a predisposition to use psychoactive substances. And that is exactly what studies that can determine causal relations find to be the best explanation for the marijuana-schizophrenia correlation.

This video reviews the MR studies examining causality between marijuana and schizophrenia.
Mendelian randomization (MR) is a method used by scientists to determine causal relationships between genetic liabilities and risk factors. In this case, the genetic liability is for schizophrenia and the risk factor is marijuana use. Because MR studies can determine causal relations, they are superior to the observational studies reporting a correlation between marijuana use and schizophrenia. Yet the MR studies on marijuana and schizophrenia get very little press compared to the less informative observational studies. The Medical Marijuana ... Laurie Wolf, Mary Wolf Best Price: $10.63 Buy New $12.43 (as of 11:30 UTC - Details)
To date, there are three MR studies [2,3,4] examining causality between marijuana and schizophrenia. As seen in the video above, the evidence strongly supports liability for schizophrenia causing an increased likelihood of marijuana smoking. In contrast, evidence for marijuana causing schizophrenia is weak and uncertain, with weaker evidence that marijuana might actually decrease the risk of schizophrenia.
With strong evidence indicating that liability for schizophrenia causes an increased likelihood of marijuana use versus weak evidence for the reverse direction of causation, we have a best explanation for the correlation between marijuana and schizophrenia, an explanation that contradicts the arguments of marijuana prohibitionists.
______________________
[1] Khokhar et al (2018): “47% of patients with schizophrenia have serious problems with drug or alcohol use during their lifetime compared to 16% of the general population. Regarding specific substances: tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and cocaine use disorders occur commonly in patients with schizophrenia.”
[2] Gage et al (2017). “Assessing causality in associations between cannabis use and schizophrenia risk: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.”
[3] Vaucher et al (2017). “Cannabis use and risk of schizophrenia: a Mendelian randomization study.”
[4] Pasman et al (2018). “GWAS of lifetime cannabis use reveals new risk loci, genetic overlap with psychiatric traits, and a causal influence of schizophrenia.”
The Best of Ian Williams Goddard


lewrockwell--2020-02-10--Here Is the Cure for 2019-nCoR Coronavirus

While laboratories around the world are racing to develop a safe and effective vaccine against the mutated coronavirus , now known as 2019-nCoR , which is said to have killed hundreds , and with rumors Chinese health authorities are hiding more dead bodies underneath the floor boards of their newly constructed coronavirus hospitals , there is already a non-vaccine cure .
Convincing visual lab-dish evidence is shown below .
( Because bots read these reports and censor them or bury them on obscure web pages when they refer to natural remedies , you need to click here for the identity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ search would have been unlikely to find this this report . )
CEPI : part of the problem or the solution ?
Certainly , don ’ t tell a new world order organization called the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations ( CEPI ) about this coronavirus cure .
CEPI is handing out research grants to develop a vaccine .
This is free money to pharmaceutical and biotech companies and actually the whole reason for the conjured up epidemic , to develop a vaccine with public money .
Doctor Yourself : Natur ... Andrew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Buy New $ 18.21 CEPI is a private/public coalition headquartered in Norway with $ 760-billion of funding by various countries , the Wellcome trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation .
Recognize the billion-dollar reward a pharma/biotech company could gain from approval of such a vaccine .
Why , it would make a pre-planned “ killing ” in the stock market , as three such companies have been awarded research grants by CEPI .
CEPI is not just a funding agency .
As Science Magazine report says : “ CEPI supports began @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sequence of 2019-nCoR in a public database .
That happened on Friday evening , 10 January , in Bethesda , Maryland , home of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ( NIAID ) .
” CEPI researchers began to analyze the sequence of genes within the virus the next morning .
The genetic makeup of the WUHAN 2019-nCoR is said to be 80 % similar to the SARS virus ( Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome ) that erupted in 2003 that reportedly killed 774 worldwide .
What has part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear of this rarely mortal , slow-to-spread virus .
In an overkill by the World Health Organization , when air travelers return home from a trip to China they are placed in quarantine for two weeks .
The current fear being spread over the 2019-nCoR viral epidemic appears to be a drill to test public health quarantine measures .
As onerous as these quarantines are , it appears these extreme measures have been no more effective in preventing deaths in 2019-2020 compared to the SARS epidemic of 2003 .
As of February 8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmed and 724 deaths worldwide ( 2 % died ) .
According to the Centers for Disease Control , the 2003 SARS outbreak reportedly infected 8,098 people and resulted in 774 deaths ( 9.6 % died ) .
Rate of infection limits effectiveness of any future vaccine As of February 7 there were 24,953 cases in Wuhan and its environs , a city of 11 million .
Presuming all cases of coronavirus in greater Wuhan have been reported to health authorities , the risk for infection would only be 6 in 100,000 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for death is even more improbable .
Yet everyone will be expected to be inoculated once a vaccine is developed , approved and available .
In other words , if a vaccine were developed for this 2019-nCor coronavirus , 16,666 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent 1 case of coronavirus infection .
So , off the top , given the high number of people needed to vaccinate to prevent just one case of viral illness , vaccines would be categorically ineffective and costly .
If a vaccine were developed for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be vaccinated to prevent 1 case of coronavirus infection .
How many would avert coronavirus infection versus side effects ?
Let ’ s assume that all coronavirus infections have been reported to health authorities in Wuhan , China .
Let ’ s assume the occurrence of severe side effects from any upcoming approved 2019-nCoR coronavirus vaccine were the same as flu shots .
Let ’ s presume 15 % of Wuhan ’ s population is over age 65 and a vaccination rate of 100 % .
That would amount to 1,650,000 vaccinated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a study of senior adults in the U.S. ( a well-fed population ) that received standard and high-dose inactivated trivalent ( three strains ) flu vaccine for comparison , where severe side effects were reported for 0.6 % and 1.3 % of vaccinated subjects respectively .
Given that the infection rate in a population such as Wuhan is just 1 in 16,666 without vaccination in the population overall , and a higher anticipated rate of infection would be expected among senior adults , let ’ s say 30 % , which would amount @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wuhan residents .
That would amount to 495,000 coronavirus infections among an estimated 1,650,000 elderly unvaccinated residents of Wuhan .
Let ’ s presume any newly approved coronavirus vaccine is only 50 % effective at reducing coronavirus infections rates among elderly Wuhan residents based upon recent data for vaccine effectiveness studies for flu vaccine .
So maybe 247,500 cases would be prevented out of an estimated population of infected and uninfected population of 1,650,000 .
If the current death rate from coronavirus of 2 % among infected individuals is factored , then an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients would be spared due to vaccination .
Using the data from a U.S. population of similar age ( cited above ) , severe side effects would be expected to occur in 216-1000 of every 16,666 vaccinated senior adults .
Therefore , an estimated 21,384-99,000 out of 1,650,000 vaccinated senior adults in Wuhan would be expected to experience severe side effects from the vaccine leading to hospitalization .
How many vaccine-related and treatment-related deaths would occur is unknown .
Severe side effects and possibly vaccine/treatment-related deaths would vastly outnumber the number of lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instant-built hospitals in Wuhan for the coronavirus would largely be filled with patients suffering severe vaccine-related side effects , not the coronavirus infection itself .
My comparisons herein are more than fair to an imagined coronavirus vaccine because I ’ m comparing vaccine effectiveness and side effect data from healthy elderly U.S. populations versus actual data from the current coronavirus in a presumably less healthy older population suffering from a coronavirus epidemic now underway in Wuhan , China .
What You Must Know Abo ... Jeffrey Anshel OD Best Price : $ 10.78 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be forced upon the population in China , hospitals would fill with patients experiencing severe vaccine-induced side effects and would be easily confused with cases of severe coronavirus infection , leading to needless public panic , fear and needless death from treatment-related causes .
Iatrogenic ( treatment-induced ) deaths would further worsen outcomes .
Note : It is difficult to locate a list of severe side effects caused by flu vaccination .
There is online censoring of information about serious side effects of vaccines .
An online search conducted for “ severe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and never leads to a source that lists severe side effects .
Try this search for yourself .
Given that coronavirus vaccine would likely be in limited supply a CEPI representative says : “ It appears at this point in time that older individuals , probably immune-compromised individuals , individuals with other medical conditions seem to be the ones who are affected the most by the severe disease… Each country needs to prioritize whatever vaccine becomes available for those who are identified as being at the highest risk.
” Finally , an admission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of people who are at high-risk to develop coronaviral infections and , by the way , they happen to be the least likely to successfully develop antibodies to any virus following vaccination .
Why would the elderly be most vulnerable to coronavirus ?
So , the moronic response is either to develop a vaccine that contains an attenuated version of the virus itself and hope and pray it works in an immune compromised elderly adult population , or maybe even inject antibodies directly into at-risk individuals .
A report published in the Proceedings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the development of an antibody that binds to a coronavirus that would serve as prophylaxis against infection .
One plan is to develop antibodies that bind to viral proteins and , in doing so , stop the pathogen from readily infecting human cells .
Some scientific excitement surrounds the development of compound CR3022 which is said to bind and combine with antibodies that attack coronaviruses .
But why the search for antibodies against coronavirus when your body already has an organ dedicated to making them—the thymus gland ( located under your breast plate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus in play , researchers are searching for a broad-spectrum remedy .
But RNA viruses like coronavirus have high mutation rates – up to a million times greater than their host cells .
So just how can a vaccine be made that specifically protects against a strain of coronavirus when the virus itself is mutating mid-season ?
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 Of interest , in the search for a broad-spectrum coronavirus treatment , zinc-based drugs were explored .
That is no surprise , given that zinc deficiency is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caused by bacterial , viral , and fungal pathogens .
The particular type of immune cells that are affected by zinc deficiency are T lymphocytes .
The T stands for thymus gland .
These glandular T-cells are reduced in number by zinc deficiency .
A shortage of zinc also reduces the secretions ( thymulin ) from the thymus gland .
When viral particles enter the blood circulation they are confronted by so-called naïve T-cells that have not made any antibodies yet .
These T-cells aren ’ t very active without zinc .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the size of a walnut in adulthood to that of a pea without adequate zinc .
Antibody responses are reliant upon zinc .
One report concedes zinc supplementation could improve vaccination success rates .
This is the primary reason why vaccines are ineffective , particularly among the very young ( under age 2 ) and the very old ( over age 65 ) who typically have low blood levels of zinc .
High zinc deficiency rates are reported in China ( 50-70 % in children and 31 % in adults ) Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are inhumanely added to vaccines to provoke an antibody immune response .
But zinc therapy is ignored by modern medicine .
OTHER FACTS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT CORONA VIRUSES • Including the newly mutated form of the virus , there are a total of seven coronaviruses that can infect humans , the CDC says .
• Corona viruses are not new .
They were first identified as RNA viruses in 1970 .
• While most of the early reports involving coronavirus were among animals , coronavirus antibodies were reported in humans as early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corona virus didn ’ t just recently make a jump from animals to humans as widely reported .

While laboratories around the world are racing to develop a safe and effective vaccine against the mutated coronavirus, now known as 2019-nCoR, which is said to have killed hundreds, and with rumors Chinese health authorities are hiding more dead bodies underneath the floor boards of their newly constructed coronavirus hospitals, there is already a non-vaccine cure.
Convincing visual lab-dish evidence is shown below. (Because bots read these reports and censor them or bury them on obscure web pages when they refer to natural remedies, you need to click here for the identity of the cure. Otherwise an online search would have been unlikely to find this this report.)
CEPI: part of the problem or the solution?
Certainly, don’t tell a new world order organization called the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) about this coronavirus cure. CEPI is handing out research grants to develop a vaccine. This is free money to pharmaceutical and biotech companies and actually the whole reason for the conjured up epidemic, to develop a vaccine with public money. Doctor Yourself: Natur... Andrew W. Saul Best Price: $15.00 Buy New $18.21 (as of 10:15 UTC - Details)
CEPI is a private/public coalition headquartered in Norway with $760-billion of funding by various countries, the Wellcome trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Recognize the billion-dollar reward a pharma/biotech company could gain from approval of such a vaccine. Why, it would make a pre-planned “killing” in the stock market, as three such companies have been awarded research grants by CEPI.
CEPI: Not just a funding agency
CEPI is not just a funding agency. As Science Magazine report says: “CEPI supports began within hours after Chinese researchers first posted a sequence of 2019-nCoR in a public database. That happened on Friday evening, 10 January, in Bethesda, Maryland, home of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).”
CEPI researchers began to analyze the sequence of genes within the virus the next morning. The genetic makeup of the WUHAN 2019-nCoR is said to be 80% similar to the SARS virus (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) that erupted in 2003 that reportedly killed 774 worldwide.
Overkill by the World Health Organization
What has part of the world on lockdown is the news-media-generated fear of this rarely mortal, slow-to-spread virus. In an overkill by the World Health Organization, when air travelers return home from a trip to China they are placed in quarantine for two weeks.
The current fear being spread over the 2019-nCoR viral epidemic appears to be a drill to test public health quarantine measures. As onerous as these quarantines are, it appears these extreme measures have been no more effective in preventing deaths in 2019-2020 compared to the SARS epidemic of 2003.
As of February 8, 34,958 cases of coronavirus have been confirmed and 724 deaths worldwide (2% died). According to the Centers for Disease Control, the 2003 SARS outbreak reportedly infected 8,098 people and resulted in 774 deaths (9.6% died).
Rate of infection limits effectiveness of any future vaccine
As of February 7 there were 24,953 cases in Wuhan and its environs, a city of 11 million. Presuming all cases of coronavirus in greater Wuhan have been reported to health authorities, the risk for infection would only be 6 in 100,000, a very remote risk. The risk for death is even more improbable. Yet everyone will be expected to be inoculated once a vaccine is developed, approved and available.
In other words, if a vaccine were developed for this 2019-nCor coronavirus, 16,666 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent 1 case of coronavirus infection. So, off the top, given the high number of people needed to vaccinate to prevent just one case of viral illness, vaccines would be categorically ineffective and costly.
If a vaccine were developed for this 2019-nCor coronavirus, 16,666 people would need to be vaccinated
to prevent 1 case of coronavirus infection.
How many would avert coronavirus infection versus side effects?
Let’s assume that all coronavirus infections have been reported to health authorities in Wuhan, China.
Let’s assume the occurrence of severe side effects from any upcoming approved 2019-nCoR coronavirus vaccine were the same as flu shots.
Let’s presume 15% of Wuhan’s population is over age 65 and a vaccination rate of 100%. That would amount to 1,650,000 vaccinated elderly individuals.
Let’s use a study of senior adults in the U.S. (a well-fed population) that received standard and high-dose inactivated trivalent (three strains) flu vaccine for comparison, where severe side effects were reported for 0.6% and 1.3% of vaccinated subjects respectively.
Given that the infection rate in a population such as Wuhan is just 1 in 16,666 without vaccination in the population overall, and a higher anticipated rate of infection would be expected among senior adults, let’s say 30%, which would amount to 4,999 infected among every 16,666 elderly Wuhan residents. That would amount to 495,000 coronavirus infections among an estimated 1,650,000 elderly unvaccinated residents of Wuhan.
Let’s presume any newly approved coronavirus vaccine is only 50% effective at reducing coronavirus infections rates among elderly Wuhan residents based upon recent data for vaccine effectiveness studies for flu vaccine. So maybe 247,500 cases would be prevented out of an estimated population of infected and uninfected population of 1,650,000.
If the current death rate from coronavirus of 2% among infected individuals is factored, then an estimated 4950 lives out of 247,500 infected patients would be spared due to vaccination.
Using the data from a U.S. population of similar age (cited above), severe side effects would be expected to occur in 216-1000 of every 16,666 vaccinated senior adults. Therefore, an estimated 21,384-99,000 out of 1,650,000 vaccinated senior adults in Wuhan would be expected to experience severe side effects from the vaccine leading to hospitalization. How many vaccine-related and treatment-related deaths would occur is unknown. Severe side effects and possibly vaccine/treatment-related deaths would vastly outnumber the number of lives saved via vaccination.
Those widely publicized instant-built hospitals in Wuhan for the coronavirus would largely be filled with patients suffering severe vaccine-related side effects, not the coronavirus infection itself.
My comparisons herein are more than fair to an imagined coronavirus vaccine because I’m comparing vaccine effectiveness and side effect data from healthy elderly U.S. populations versus actual data from the current coronavirus in a presumably less healthy older population suffering from a coronavirus epidemic now underway in Wuhan, China. What You Must Know Abo... Anshel OD, Jeffrey Best Price: $3.56 Buy New $11.75 (as of 10:45 UTC - Details)
Once mass vaccination would be forced upon the population in China, hospitals would fill with patients experiencing severe vaccine-induced side effects and would be easily confused with cases of severe coronavirus infection, leading to needless public panic, fear and needless death from treatment-related causes. Iatrogenic (treatment-induced) deaths would further worsen outcomes.
Serious side effects from flu vaccination include:
Allergic reaction
Anaphylaxis
Anaphylactic shock
Angioedema
Arthritis
Asthma
Bell’s palsy
Brachial plexus neuropathy
Brain damage
Cellulitis
Coma
Convulsions
Cranial nerve paralysis
Death
Encephalopathy
Encephalomyelitis
Erythema multiforme
Extensive limb swelling
Febrile seizures
Fever
Flu-like illness
Fainting
Infection
Guillain-Barré Syndrome
Meningitis
Microscopic polyangitis
Migraine headache
Myelitis
Nerve damage (neuropathy)
Neuralgia
Neurological disorders
Numbness and tingling
Optic neuritis
Paresthesia
Paralysis
Partial facial paralysis
Rash
Respiratory distress
Seizure
Serum sickness
SIRVA (Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration)
Skin reactions
Spinal cord inflammation
Stevens-Johnson Syndrome
Syncope and pre-syncope (fainting)
Tachycardia
Thrombocytopenia
Tonic-clonic limb movements
Transverse myelitis
Upper respiratory tract infection
Vasculitis with transient kidney involvement
Vision problems
Note: It is difficult to locate a list of severe side effects caused by flu vaccination. There is online censoring of information about serious side effects of vaccines. An online search conducted for “severe side effects, flu vaccine” redirects and never leads to a source that lists severe side effects. Try this search for yourself.
CEPI: focus on immune compromised individuals
Given that coronavirus vaccine would likely be in limited supply a CEPI representative says: “It appears at this point in time that older individuals, probably immune-compromised individuals, individuals with other medical conditions seem to be the ones who are affected the most by the severe disease… Each country needs to prioritize whatever vaccine becomes available for those who are identified as being at the highest risk.”
Finally, an admission that there are only a small number of people who are at high-risk to develop coronaviral infections and, by the way, they happen to be the least likely to successfully develop antibodies to any virus following vaccination.
Why would the elderly be most vulnerable to coronavirus?
Answer: Because they don’t develop adequate antibodies.
Inject antibodies?
So, the moronic response is either to develop a vaccine that contains an attenuated version of the virus itself and hope and pray it works in an immune compromised elderly adult population, or maybe even inject antibodies directly into at-risk individuals.
A report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences notes the development of an antibody that binds to a coronavirus that would serve as prophylaxis against infection.
(Need coronavirus antibodies? You can purchase coronavirus antibodies online -$358 for a quarter of a milligram. But you just have to be a certified research lab to order.)
One plan is to develop antibodies that bind to viral proteins and, in doing so, stop the pathogen from readily infecting human cells. Some scientific excitement surrounds the development of compound CR3022 which is said to bind and combine with antibodies that attack coronaviruses.
But why the search for antibodies against coronavirus when your body already has an organ dedicated to making them—the thymus gland (located under your breast plate)?
Broad-spectrum antivirals needed
With potentially seven strains of coronavirus in play, researchers are searching for a broad-spectrum remedy. But RNA viruses like coronavirus have high mutation rates – up to a million times greater than their host cells. So just how can a vaccine be made that specifically protects against a strain of coronavirus when the virus itself is mutating mid-season? Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
Zinc-based remedies ignored
Of interest, in the search for a broad-spectrum coronavirus treatment, zinc-based drugs were explored.
That is no surprise, given that zinc deficiency is associated with increased susceptibility to infectious diseases caused by bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. The particular type of immune cells that are affected by zinc deficiency are T lymphocytes. The T stands for thymus gland. These glandular T-cells are reduced in number by zinc deficiency. A shortage of zinc also reduces the secretions (thymulin) from the thymus gland.
When viral particles enter the blood circulation they are confronted by so-called naïve T-cells that have not made any antibodies yet. These T-cells aren’t very active without zinc. In fact, the thymus gland itself shrinks from the size of a walnut in adulthood to that of a pea without adequate zinc. Antibody responses are reliant upon zinc.
One report concedes zinc supplementation could improve vaccination success rates. This is the primary reason why vaccines are ineffective, particularly among the very young (under age 2) and the very old (over age 65) who typically have low blood levels of zinc. High zinc deficiency rates are reported in China (50-70% in children and 31% in adults)
Instead, toxic adjuvants like mercury and aluminum are inhumanely added to vaccines to provoke an antibody immune response. But zinc therapy is ignored by modern medicine.
OTHER FACTS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT CORONA VIRUSES