There is nothing to say that has not already been said. There is nothing to do that has not already been done. There is nothing to see that hasn't already been seen. And yet, here we are. Thank you for your tireless effort towards waking up a coma-induced world!
Hi Dr. Ma-Lion/ess! The hubris, greed and depravity of the pharmaceutical-medical-industrial complex is without end . Humans don't have much self awareness about their deeply flawed natures.
Pharma et al in dedicated to jabbing every human on planet earth with poison. This time it is called cov2 blah blah blah. Last time it was Gardasil, hundreds of thousands of fertile young humans were irretrievably rendered sterile, immuno-compromised, or dead. Before that it was MMR and generations of autistic young boys. Before that the real big killer was to deal with AIDS, AZT. Among the AZT murdered were among the greatest (tortured) talent in the nation. It isn't that THIS vaccine alone is bad-they ALL are more harmful than helpful.
If your cook poisoned your lunch, why would you trust him with your dinner?
I'm not sure Hannah Arendt is correct when she is talking about the banality of evil.
What the argument revolves around is the word "think" or "thinking." It's a bit vague. As it happens, I'm interested in stories, consequently in characters, and their mental dynamics. I've found it's convenient to divide the mind into four parts: the visceral, the emotional, the rational, and the spiritual. That's probably an oversimplification from the point of view of specialists in psychiatry or neurophysiology, but it works well as a starting point when examining stories and characters. The first three -- visceral, emotional, and rational -- are properties of brain function. But the fourth isn't. Nowadays considerations of the spiritual aspect of mind have gone out of fashion, owing to the influence of Enlightenment Philosophy and its concern with rationality. But we might do well to maintain focus on it, if possible, especially since various well-thought-of authors, such as Shakespeare, Tolstoy, and Tolkien, have concerned themselves with it when devising their stories.
From their point of view -- what C.S. Lewis once termed the "discarded image" -- the spiritual is the more significant. Moreover the lower levels can operate more or less independently of it. So for example we might have a character who can "think" at a high degree of activity or competency on the level of reason, and nevertheless be evil: "He is very wise, and weighs all things to a nicety in the scales of his malice" as someone once put it.
If we go back and review the writings of, say, St. Thomas Aquinas, we might find a more detailed analysis of what is really going on. It boils down to the opposition between sin and virtue. Everyone is at least passingly familiar with the Seven Deadly sins, for instance, but what is not often remembered is that each has a corresponding virtue. And if we really want to be technical we can go back to Hildegard von Bingen (twelfth century), who devised a list of 35 sin/virtue pairs (reminds one of DNA). From this standpoint what is happening, in certain people, is not the result of incompetency in the sphere of rational thought, but rather a wrong orientation of the will. And there is such a thing as the Theory of the Progression of Evil, too, unfortunately (perhaps well exemplified in Macbeth, among other works). That's what we're dealing with here, and what we have always been dealing with. What did Tolstoy say about it, it was something like, "The whole history of pagan times is nothing but a recital of the incidents and means by which the more wicked gained possession of power over the less wicked and maintained it by cruelties and deceptions, ruling over the good under the pretense of guarding the right and protecting the good from the wicked."
There was also no COVID-19 pandemic. A lot of people got sick in Northern Italy and New York City in 2020, but we don't know what they had. The COVID-19 test is a fraud, so they may have had coronavirus SARS COV2 or they may not have. We simply have no idea. Same with everyone else subsequently diagnosed with "COVID-19". All could have SARS COV2 infections, none, or anywhere in between. There is no evidence that can be brought to bear that would prove or disprove any of these possibilities. It is all fine and well to say, that's highly unlikely, or that is an absurd idea! So was heliocentrism when it was first proposed. So was Semmelweis' notion of contagion of delivering women by medical professionals. So was the notion that HIV isn't the cause of AIDS. Many "ridiculous" ideas find subsequent support from science. There was a pandemic of fear. There was a pandemic of vaccine induced illness. But there is simply no proof there was a pandemic of SARS COV2 -- hence Iain Davis's reframe "pseudo pandemic".
The only good coming from this entire fiasco...many are waking up to the truth...that there are no real vaccines, period. There are only money making products marketed by the drug industry with lies as to their effectiveness. if people had been taught to question in our educational system and not accept everything being taught verbatim, we would not be in the mess we are today.
Does the lack of efficacy of the Monkeypox vaccine cast doubt on the "foundational vaccine narrative" that the WHO's smallpox vaccine eliminated smallpox?
I believe if we continue to look close enough at all of the microscopic “stuff” of which we are all composed, those with an agenda will surely find something else with which to scare us! Ludicrous!
Monkeypox and leaky vaccines
I’ve noticed that these agencies tend to experiment on the very populations they purport to support and defend.
To summarize, “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”
― George Orwell, 1984
There is nothing to say that has not already been said. There is nothing to do that has not already been done. There is nothing to see that hasn't already been seen. And yet, here we are. Thank you for your tireless effort towards waking up a coma-induced world!
What's the point in having a panel of experts if your plan is to choose a specific, desired outcome from the start?
If Eric Ding has not received at least 5 covid shots by now, he needs to be encouraged to get up to date.
Hi Dr. Ma-Lion/ess! The hubris, greed and depravity of the pharmaceutical-medical-industrial complex is without end . Humans don't have much self awareness about their deeply flawed natures.
"And their evil actions often stem from..."
How about ...greed?
Excellent stack Doc! 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻
Pharma et al in dedicated to jabbing every human on planet earth with poison. This time it is called cov2 blah blah blah. Last time it was Gardasil, hundreds of thousands of fertile young humans were irretrievably rendered sterile, immuno-compromised, or dead. Before that it was MMR and generations of autistic young boys. Before that the real big killer was to deal with AIDS, AZT. Among the AZT murdered were among the greatest (tortured) talent in the nation. It isn't that THIS vaccine alone is bad-they ALL are more harmful than helpful.
If your cook poisoned your lunch, why would you trust him with your dinner?
I'm not sure Hannah Arendt is correct when she is talking about the banality of evil.
What the argument revolves around is the word "think" or "thinking." It's a bit vague. As it happens, I'm interested in stories, consequently in characters, and their mental dynamics. I've found it's convenient to divide the mind into four parts: the visceral, the emotional, the rational, and the spiritual. That's probably an oversimplification from the point of view of specialists in psychiatry or neurophysiology, but it works well as a starting point when examining stories and characters. The first three -- visceral, emotional, and rational -- are properties of brain function. But the fourth isn't. Nowadays considerations of the spiritual aspect of mind have gone out of fashion, owing to the influence of Enlightenment Philosophy and its concern with rationality. But we might do well to maintain focus on it, if possible, especially since various well-thought-of authors, such as Shakespeare, Tolstoy, and Tolkien, have concerned themselves with it when devising their stories.
From their point of view -- what C.S. Lewis once termed the "discarded image" -- the spiritual is the more significant. Moreover the lower levels can operate more or less independently of it. So for example we might have a character who can "think" at a high degree of activity or competency on the level of reason, and nevertheless be evil: "He is very wise, and weighs all things to a nicety in the scales of his malice" as someone once put it.
If we go back and review the writings of, say, St. Thomas Aquinas, we might find a more detailed analysis of what is really going on. It boils down to the opposition between sin and virtue. Everyone is at least passingly familiar with the Seven Deadly sins, for instance, but what is not often remembered is that each has a corresponding virtue. And if we really want to be technical we can go back to Hildegard von Bingen (twelfth century), who devised a list of 35 sin/virtue pairs (reminds one of DNA). From this standpoint what is happening, in certain people, is not the result of incompetency in the sphere of rational thought, but rather a wrong orientation of the will. And there is such a thing as the Theory of the Progression of Evil, too, unfortunately (perhaps well exemplified in Macbeth, among other works). That's what we're dealing with here, and what we have always been dealing with. What did Tolstoy say about it, it was something like, "The whole history of pagan times is nothing but a recital of the incidents and means by which the more wicked gained possession of power over the less wicked and maintained it by cruelties and deceptions, ruling over the good under the pretense of guarding the right and protecting the good from the wicked."
Of course, perhaps asking people to temper and moderate their promiscuity is off the table. Silly me.
But "Dr. Eric Feigel-Ding????" Seriously????
The push to continue the fear factor to control your mental atitude towards medicine continues without abatement! https://thomasabraunrph.substack.com/p/battle-for-your-brain
There was also no COVID-19 pandemic. A lot of people got sick in Northern Italy and New York City in 2020, but we don't know what they had. The COVID-19 test is a fraud, so they may have had coronavirus SARS COV2 or they may not have. We simply have no idea. Same with everyone else subsequently diagnosed with "COVID-19". All could have SARS COV2 infections, none, or anywhere in between. There is no evidence that can be brought to bear that would prove or disprove any of these possibilities. It is all fine and well to say, that's highly unlikely, or that is an absurd idea! So was heliocentrism when it was first proposed. So was Semmelweis' notion of contagion of delivering women by medical professionals. So was the notion that HIV isn't the cause of AIDS. Many "ridiculous" ideas find subsequent support from science. There was a pandemic of fear. There was a pandemic of vaccine induced illness. But there is simply no proof there was a pandemic of SARS COV2 -- hence Iain Davis's reframe "pseudo pandemic".
The only good coming from this entire fiasco...many are waking up to the truth...that there are no real vaccines, period. There are only money making products marketed by the drug industry with lies as to their effectiveness. if people had been taught to question in our educational system and not accept everything being taught verbatim, we would not be in the mess we are today.
Does the lack of efficacy of the Monkeypox vaccine cast doubt on the "foundational vaccine narrative" that the WHO's smallpox vaccine eliminated smallpox?
I believe if we continue to look close enough at all of the microscopic “stuff” of which we are all composed, those with an agenda will surely find something else with which to scare us! Ludicrous!