In 2004, it was Bush-hate. Today, Trump-hate. At the NYT, Tom Cotton (Rep)-hate, for calling for US troops to be used to quell the violent riots.
Two years ago it was Kavanaugh-hate.

The Nazis created hate against the Jews.
Democrats today are creating hate against Republicans.

(The conversation in my head with a Democrat friend who says: “Trump is Hitler”.

“Hmm. Hate feels good, doesn’t it? To hate Trump, and feel so righteous about it. Doesn’t it feel good to hate Trump?
I’m sure the Nazis had similar good feelings when they hated Jews. Do you think your feelings are similar to those Nazi feelings? Feeling good about hating?”)

Times like these when I’m glad not to be in the US. It’s not yet nearly this bad in Slovakia.

====================

Well, at least since 2004 (?) when they rushed out the Iraq body count article so that it would be published before the US election. Not that they wanted to influence the election in any way, or anything.

At the time (from memory), using the Lancet numbers, I came up with an average of 600-700 ‘extra’ deaths a day. Given that war is not a well organized production line, there had to be days with 1000+ ‘extra’ deaths.

Does anyone seriously think that the press wouldn’t have screamed at the top of their lungs over that? That didn’t happen, so let’s just say I’m sceptical about that study.

Since I’ve seen this scene before, and when the too convenient story broke, I was expecting fraud. This science as propaganda started in climate, it’s spread everywhere.

Feel welcome to join me in my studied and professional cynicism. Trends that cannot go on forever will end, we’re told. Realism is the heroic stance in this because there is no joy in suffering through Sysiphus’ merde.

The multiple molecular mechanisms by which chloroquine can achieve such results remain to be further explored. … preliminary data indicate that chloroquine interferes with SARS-CoV-2 attempts to acidify the lysosomes and presumably inhibits cathepsins, which require a low pH for optimal cleavage of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

Zn2+ Inhibits Coronavirus and Arterivirus RNA Polymerase Activity In Vitro and Zinc Ionophores Block the Replication of These Viruses in Cell Culture

HCQ is the border guard, while Zinc is the Choice in a Planned Pathogen (PP) protocol.

As with all drugs, vaccines, etc., this disinfectant cocktail is not a magical elixir. One long-time known, not exception, but caveat is:

Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency

people with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency, hemolytic anemia is most often triggered by bacterial or viral infections or by certain drugs (such as some antibiotics and medications used to treat malaria). Hemolytic anemia can also occur after eating fava beans or inhaling pollen from fava plants (a reaction called favism).

Lefties don’t care. Get the garbage published and the MSM will push it as if it were revealed truth handed down from on high. It’s a deliberate strategy. Been playing the game this way for decades. These are just political weapons. Like the hockey stick and the wacko polar bear study. These “studies” would flunk a middle school science fair for special needs kids. They are worse than ridiculous. Doesn’t matter. They were published. Therefore must be true. The end.

Our society has an “expert” fetish and a really bizarre respect for peer review and published “research”. The public has no idea that there is ZERO quality control for any of this garbage.

This is such an awful time … locked down and inundated by propaganda. It’s isolating and terrifying.

Struggling to summon optimism here. Seriously afraid to even post this. They will stop at nothing – pogroms, gulags, property seizure, mass executions.

and

“Why did you execute Bogrov?”

“Why? Because of the submarine question,” said Ivanov. “It concerned the problem of tonnage—an old quarrel, the beginnings of which must be familiar to you. Bogrov advocated the construction of submarines of large tonnage and a
long range of action. The Party is in favour of small submarines with a short range. You can build three times as many small submarines for your money as big ones. Both parties had valid technical arguments. The experts made a big display of technical sketches and algebraic formulae; but the actual problem lay in quite a different sphere. Big submarines mean: a policy of aggression, to further world revolution. Small submarines mean coastal defense—that is, self-defense and postponement of world revolution. The latter is the point of view of No. 1, and the Party. Bogrov had a strong following in the Admiralty and amongst the officers of the old guard. It would not have been enough
to put him out of the way; he also had to be discredited. A trial was projected to unmask the partisans of big tonnage as saboteurs and traitors. We had already brought several little engineers to the point of being willing to confess publicly to
whatever we liked. But Bogrov wouldn’t play the game. He declaimed up to the very end of big tonnage and world revolution. He was two decades behind the times. He would not understand that the times are against us, that Europe is
passing through a period of reaction, that we are in the hollow of a wave and must wait until we are lifted by the next. In a public trial he would only have created confusion amongst the people. There was no other way possible than to liquidate him administratively. Would not you have done the same thing in our position?”

–Arthur Koestler, ‘Darkness at Noon’

[1] This is not about science. What The Lancet published was a fucking statistics, nothing less, nothing more. That’s not science, the same reason a screw is not a machine.

[2] This is basically a war on terms. Right now, you publish some random statistics and format them as a paper, that’s “science”. You criticize it, then you “deny science”. You point out any campaign that it’s out there, in plain sight, that’s “conspiracy”. You point out the high criminality or the low IQ in the black community (which are facts, not even opinions), that’s “racism”. And so on. Modern politics and journalism is about labeling. And it works.

—

At the end of the day, this is political marketing. If you criticize Trump supporting hydroxychloroquine, that sounds as politics. If you release some bad done statistics, but you publish it in some peer-reviewed journal and you say that’s “science”, then it becomes politically useful. That’s why organizations that control published papers or science funding are becoming more and more politically controlled.

About one year ago, a paper was deleted because it was politically incorrect. Only a few people cared. It was extremely important, though, because it was the first time in history that a published paper was completely erased from records. No matter how wrong it’s a paper, it was never erased before. It could be debunked, but not erased. 20 years ago, that would have been a huge scandal and that paper would have been restored. Not anymore.

What mattered was not that particular paper. What mattered is that it was a symptom that peer-reviewed journals were already controlled. Science is becoming less science and more another tool for political marketing.

It’s causing despair for even the most wide-eyed optimist.

And it looks like Gaia, too, has had it, simply had it—ENOUGH of all this rank, partisan dishonesty—and will no longer restrain her rage, anger, disdain and disgust. The gloves are off:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/swarm-earthquakes-yellowstone-renews-fears-supervolcano-eruption