The KEY to the whole shamdemic was the suppression of early treatments. There's no PANDEMIC with early treatments. No emergency authorization for the vaccines. The suppression of early treatments was the foundation for this phony sham to rid Trump from office and give power to the Democrat Nazis of America.
Fauci is no more a "doctor" than Jill Biden. He's never practiced medicine and has no credentials. As a firefighter/EMP - i've treated more patients than Fouxi!
I'd go to Max Jacobson before I'd go to Fauci. As far as I know, amphetamine doesn't cause clots. If you take enough it can damage your heart, but just a little will not damage a healthy heart.
The god complex is very much a part of human nature. A person of weak character will let this flaw grow and feed the ego. People like a Christine Grady or an Anthony Fauci become victims of this flaw because of their position and influence (aka unelected, high-level health bureaucrats). The “health crisis” rockets them (and several others) from deep state obscurity to national prominence. Bureaucrats treasure recognition of their position and influence, but to be publicly recognized and sought after is a dream come true. The media breathlessly seeks out and finds a photogenic, articulate, creditable expert to “make copy”. And so the god complex grows and the truth is hidden in the narrative. Obfuscations, intimidations, demonizations, speech suppressions, mischaracterizations are used so the power of the fear mongers can prevail over the truth. The truth…herd immunity protects, mRNA vaccines are at best prophylactics, the virus is an influenza, a danger to only the elderly and infirm, cloth masks are ineffective, you die of the virus or with the virus, hospital compensations distort death reports, contrary opinions/evidence suppressed, only biased research funded…is now overtaking the narrative.
Our Founding Fathers designed a government to give Americans the liberty to protect ourselves from these false gods.
Where is the line in “public health” and inalienable rights about life. It sounds like the husband making the virus in the lab and the wife deciding how to manage the people ethically after they are exposed....excuse me but How about we let God run this show not you two mucking around w this shit?
Another solid article Adam regarding the dangerous fauci oligarchs. They hold an elitist position and have lost touch with regular humanity as well as the frontline doctors who actually dealt day to day with the disease. To think they were the scientific experts and limited us to vaccines and nothing else was the height of stupidity. They completely lost sight of all the other measures that could have saved lives, like preventatives (hydroxychloroquin, ivermectin etc used in other countries effectively) and natural immunity which comes with the viral cycle. The voices of nurses, doctors, and other researchers were silenced. Why? Why? What an absolute travesty. The lonely death syndrome, many of those elderly, was the opposite of compassion. Why couldn’t they even feel this pain? Never mind the pain between family relations broken over vaxers vs anti vaxers. Then there are lifetime businesses that died and families that are still suffering. What about the VAERS victims. They need to face these people and pay for their medical bills and losses. Both Fauci and Grady were and are blinded by their intellectual elitists’ views and need to be kicked out of all health organizations and silenced forever. I hope that all the truth comes forth so this travesty never, never happens again.
"By 2021 her public statements never suggested a limit to sacrifices the individual should ethically make on behalf of “public health,” from masking, to taking vaccines, to foregoing family gatherings even at the point of one’s own death."
-------------
You can't really "sacrifice" something if you don't have a choice -- that's bullying or coercion or threatening or a million other words, but never sacrifice.
You might want to investigate and promote the Baby Rico case that involves Fauci. Back in 2012, Fauci worked to kidnap about 60 babies with an experimental Phase 1 toxicity trial of AIDS drugs by working with child protective services to take away infants from mothers who did not want to participate in research. The story is in Steve Nagel's Substack: https://stevenagel.substack.com/
Fire the whole lot of them! Replace them with any mechanic, plumber, farmer, any tradesperson. I'll take the ethics of people who work with their hands over any academic with any "Dr." or Phd next to their name.
Yes!! Let's talk about Bioethics! When Bioethicists talk about their field they describe it as practicing "Good Stewardship" of the ignorant, unwashed masses by their educated, more sophisticated elites.
Like Pres. Obama's spokesperson said after pictures from his birthday party in 2021 revealed maskless attendees served by masked staff:
The same "sophisticated" elitism drips from the entire field of Bioethics. A very illuminating presentation of their work product can be found in this guide:
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics produced this guide to ethical public health policymaking in 2007. It is considered a gold-standard presentation of bioethics used by public policymakers internationally to help guide their decisions. It's guidance is still relevant and useful today, explaining much of what public health officials have relied upon to determine public policies. Subjects it touches on include obesity, tobacco and alcohol, infectious disease, equity and water fluoridation. That doesn't necessarily make it a good guide.
Public health policymakers can ignore evidence many accomplished experts put forward and assert their own flimsy stand-ins for evidence for as long as they want. And stand in their definition of ethics doing it. And have courts uphold their policies.. Judges go to the same types of parties like Obama has. Members of the same elite, sophisticated crowd. Who value what bioethicists have to say about public health matters.
Take the practice of water fluoridation. Very meager evidence of efficacy is asserted and upheld in the face of large bodies of evidence it's ineffective and unsafe produced by many accomplished experts. Upheld for over 75 years. Coercive public health actions that remove consent from the public, no opt-outs, judges haven't put a stop to it. They call water fluoridation ethical, following the "good stewardship" model.
I find Chapter 7, Water Fluoridation beginning on page 121 (153) useful in the context of community masking mandates. It all is useful to read to gain full context, and beginning on page 135 (167) is a section on Consent that gets to the principles that inform public policymakers on the ethics of coercive public health actions that remove the consent of the public, no way to opt-out.
Throughout the entire guide and even in the section on Fluoridation it gives voice to individual free choice. That it rarely honors in its final subject guidance. With water fluoridation it shares that even after over 60 years (in 2007, now over 75 years) of fluoridating water there's little compelling evidence that it is effective. It acknowledges that in lab studies some results have been promising, but clear scientific results have never been produced that show it works as claimed in a community setting. It also acknowledges that opponents of fluoridating water have produced lab studies showing harmful effects, including increased cancer, from fluoridated water, but they've been disputed by proponents of fluoridation and so there's no clear scientific results that shows it is unquestionably harmful. Earlier in the guide it makes the case that no ethical public policy should be made so coercive it removes consent unless it is proven to be safe and effective.
With regards to fluoridation it says that because there's no clear, compelling evidence on either side that nation's ought not make it public policy for ethical reasons. *But* it goes on to offer that if local communities wish to do so they may (like mask mandates). Then shifting the burden of proof onto opponents of fluoridation to shows clear, unquestionable scientific evidence it is unsafe. Violating the very ethics of the guide it purports to adhere to.
Apply this same reasoning to pandemic mitigation public policy, including mandatory mask mandates, policies that remove individual consent for a proclaimed collective public health concern. Know that water fluoridation has over 75 years of practice now in many communities, with no compelling evidence it is effective at preventing cavities (caries). But based on mere assertions of efficacy local communities fluoridate water. And because opponents aren't able to produce scientific evidence of harm that satisfies the proponents of fluoridation it is deemed ethical public policy at the local community level. With this model as a guide, local communities could continue with mask mandates for 75 years without any compelling evidence, dismissing all evidence of harms presented by opponents. And consider themselves ethical. Even "Good Stewards" of their citizens.
This bioethics guide proclaims its product represents the ideal of "Good Stewardship" that balances the competing interests of individual choice and freedom with the collective's public health and safety required sacrifices. In fact, it gives mere lip service to individual choice and freedom as it minimizes the value of it, while giving broad deference to presumptions of necessary collective sacrifices with little scrutiny. But because it gives any kind of voice to the individual it pats itself on the back for balancing the competing interests. It's mental masturbation for the creators of it, with multiple exclamations of King Solomon-like wisdom.
When one 'follows the money' of The Nuffield Council on Bioethics they'll discover that it is funded largely by Wellcome Trust (Glaxo-Wellcome, Big Pharma). Wellcome Trust is a peer influencer on public health policy of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Actually older and more esteemed.
Wellcome Trust was headed by Jeremy Farrar. His name has surfaced in Anthony Fauci's emails concerning the origins of CV, communications strategies like spin (propaganda) and censorship, along with suggested pandemic protocols. Farrar resigned from the UK's SAGE SPI-B pandemic advisory board because its recommendations weren't totalitarian enough for his liking: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/02/jeremy-farrar-sage-scientist-quits-over-concerning-uk-covid-picture-reports
But before Farrar left Wellcome Trust, another one of the organizations he helped fund like Nuffield Bioethics Council is Wellcome LEAP, led by former DARPA and Big Tech Manipulation, Deception and Surveillance Specialist Regina Dugan:
The field of Bioethics has many tentacles that extend outward from it. Carrying with them the same contemptuousness of the hoi polloi that the self-imagined elite among us hold to most all areas of public policy.
Bioethics informs and directs public policymaking on important issues, like influencing the development and ethics of newgenics, biotech, transhumanism, public health policy:
Buck v. Bell, American Eugenics, and the Bad Man Test:
Putting Limits on Newgenics in the 21st Century
Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality, January, 2020
Buck v. Bell is an important SCOTUS decision that is overlooked today, even though it still stands today, only some of its sharper edges rounded off in Oklahoma v Skinner in the 1940's. Upheld as recently as 2001. Bioethics, embraced by practitioners of the pseudosciences that led to the practice of eugenics. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes penned, "Three generations of imbeciles is enough" to uphold the practice. In this piece by Walter Berns he touches on behavioral science manipulations and deceits. Which is The Science (TM) of pandemic NPI protocols:
Masks, social distancing, quarantines, contact tracing, etc, none of that was based in medical science. All are behavioral science tricks and tools that are a part of the epidemiologists bag of tricks to change behaviors by changing perspectives of the ignorant masses to fit what their elite "good stewards" want them to believe. The chosen NPI was fear amplification. Because our "more sophisticated" betters said we suffered...suffered...from "optimism bias." So they had to "fix" our too optimistic perspectives:
[The first 14 pages get into a game theory type application of behavioral sciences on judicial philosophy. In trying to understand the rulings of the Roberts court it could be speaking to the same philosophy. The final 14 pages are very informative and cautionary for the type of governance we are being subjected to today.]
Speaking of the Roberts-led SCOTUS, this is interesting to consider. Health Affairs is a very important and influential Behavioral health policy resource::
"Health Affairs articles are cited by U.S. administration officials, U.S. lawmakers, and ministry of health leaders around the globe. Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle reference Health Affairs in drafting legislation. US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts cited the journal in his decision regarding the Affordable Care Act. In addition, Health Affairs is frequently cited by national media, including the Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, network television and radio, and NPR."
The same publication that informs Justice Roberts in his legal reasoning had this to say early in 2020 about masks: They don't work...but...the symbolism is needed:
Never mind that symbols are speech, the earliest form of speech, understood by the illiterate. Mandating speech is the other side of the same free speech coin that prohibiting speech/censorship is. Our First Amendment right. That a Chief Justice ignores. A right no more. Those who said masks weren't their hill to die on in 2020 were saying that the First Amendment wasn't their hill to die on, whether they knew it or not. And now many of those same people awakening to the threat of censorship all around us still haven't made the connection to their consent to mandated speech, symbolic masks, paved the way for prohibited speech. Because following the science of totalitarianism, behavioral science, is incompatible with free speech.
And Behavioral Science and Bioethics go hand-in-hand. Weapons of the "sophisticated" elites to manipulate and coerce the ignorant and imbeciles to do what they're told to do. Consent to totalitarianism manufactured by linguistic sorcerers. And Christine Grady, Mrs. Fauci is a very important player in this "fundamental change" descending on our nation and the world.
Another very important player in this fundamental change descending on our nation is Cass Sunstein. His Bioethical Behavioral Science is central to it. He likes piloting the cockpit of the big government drone over all things:
His book, "Nudge" led to the establishment of this "Nudge Unit", Social and Behavioral Science Team. Now known as the Office of Evaluation Services under the GSA:
Sunstein coauthored the behavioral science fear amplification pandemic NPI plan – masks, lockdowns, contact tracing, social distancing, coercion, manipulation, etc:
The UK and US behaviorism efforts, including pandemic related have been joined at the hip from inception. The UK has been more forthcoming about it, so you'll find a lot of references to efforts in both nations. This pandemic truly is a war for our minds with The Science (TM) as the main weapon:
Here's the plug-and-play app for those better and more sophisticated elites we're grateful to have coercing and manipulating us for our own good using Behavioral Science-informed propaganda campaigns. Masks. Vaccines. Gender. Climate. Race. Can be used for any issue du jour:
The UK's pandemic behavioral science team, SPI-B, has been led by a radical Marxist, Susan Michie - described as such by her fellow Marxists who kicked her out of the Communist Party for being too much of a radical:
(Joined by Jeremy Farrar from Wellcome Trust now the WHO's Chief Scientist, as previously described. The WHO, led by leading totalitarians, as they seek to dictate international health public policies and emergency powers over nations. Nothing to see here. Move along.)
Sunstein's UK co-author, Richard Thaler and Nudge:
Sunstein’s protege, Jessica Hertz, Obama administration to Facebook senior legal, to Biden administration back to Big Tech - Government inside Big Tech inside government, collaborating with propaganda and censorship efforts like those exposed in Twitter Files:
Sunstein has another important protege, Maya Shankar. She headed up the SBST under Obama. Left to become Google’s Chief Global Behavioral Scientist when Trump came into office:
Shankar describes behavioral science, aka The Science (TM) to the Council on Foreign Relations on how governments can impose policy with psychological manipulation:
[Note: the article acknowledges that they can’t speak freely on how the behavioral sciences are being used by government to coerce and manipulate populations on the record, they save those conversations for behind closed doors]
Sunstein has many protege's who've fanned out inside government, media and Big Tech. His wife is another key player. Samantha Power. Also a practitioner of behavioral science-informed propaganda and censorship. Focused on international relations, foreign policy, with a biotech twist.
Benghazi, Ukraine, Republic of Georgia, whatever she touches turns to sh*t:
Adam, there's a lot here in this comment thread that I wish I had the resources to get the associated records for. I have no doubt that the trails this information leads to are to high value actors in this unfolding global tragedy. I hope it inspires others to follow it to additional information that Opens The Books to the powerful actors in it. I'll happily share more research and information I've put together to admin and readers. Thank you for your work.
I can feel the rage. Don't get in its way.
The KEY to the whole shamdemic was the suppression of early treatments. There's no PANDEMIC with early treatments. No emergency authorization for the vaccines. The suppression of early treatments was the foundation for this phony sham to rid Trump from office and give power to the Democrat Nazis of America.
Hang her too.
It would appear that whoring for big pharma pays quite well.
We have friends that died alone thanks to these two megalomaniacs.
They deserve the same fate for what they have done.
What's the saying about a Duck? BIOTERRORISM!
Fauci is no more a "doctor" than Jill Biden. He's never practiced medicine and has no credentials. As a firefighter/EMP - i've treated more patients than Fouxi!
I'd go to Max Jacobson before I'd go to Fauci. As far as I know, amphetamine doesn't cause clots. If you take enough it can damage your heart, but just a little will not damage a healthy heart.
ldadover
The god complex is very much a part of human nature. A person of weak character will let this flaw grow and feed the ego. People like a Christine Grady or an Anthony Fauci become victims of this flaw because of their position and influence (aka unelected, high-level health bureaucrats). The “health crisis” rockets them (and several others) from deep state obscurity to national prominence. Bureaucrats treasure recognition of their position and influence, but to be publicly recognized and sought after is a dream come true. The media breathlessly seeks out and finds a photogenic, articulate, creditable expert to “make copy”. And so the god complex grows and the truth is hidden in the narrative. Obfuscations, intimidations, demonizations, speech suppressions, mischaracterizations are used so the power of the fear mongers can prevail over the truth. The truth…herd immunity protects, mRNA vaccines are at best prophylactics, the virus is an influenza, a danger to only the elderly and infirm, cloth masks are ineffective, you die of the virus or with the virus, hospital compensations distort death reports, contrary opinions/evidence suppressed, only biased research funded…is now overtaking the narrative.
Our Founding Fathers designed a government to give Americans the liberty to protect ourselves from these false gods.
Where is the line in “public health” and inalienable rights about life. It sounds like the husband making the virus in the lab and the wife deciding how to manage the people ethically after they are exposed....excuse me but How about we let God run this show not you two mucking around w this shit?
I would like to be present when the quack comes face to face with his Maker.
Another solid article Adam regarding the dangerous fauci oligarchs. They hold an elitist position and have lost touch with regular humanity as well as the frontline doctors who actually dealt day to day with the disease. To think they were the scientific experts and limited us to vaccines and nothing else was the height of stupidity. They completely lost sight of all the other measures that could have saved lives, like preventatives (hydroxychloroquin, ivermectin etc used in other countries effectively) and natural immunity which comes with the viral cycle. The voices of nurses, doctors, and other researchers were silenced. Why? Why? What an absolute travesty. The lonely death syndrome, many of those elderly, was the opposite of compassion. Why couldn’t they even feel this pain? Never mind the pain between family relations broken over vaxers vs anti vaxers. Then there are lifetime businesses that died and families that are still suffering. What about the VAERS victims. They need to face these people and pay for their medical bills and losses. Both Fauci and Grady were and are blinded by their intellectual elitists’ views and need to be kicked out of all health organizations and silenced forever. I hope that all the truth comes forth so this travesty never, never happens again.
"By 2021 her public statements never suggested a limit to sacrifices the individual should ethically make on behalf of “public health,” from masking, to taking vaccines, to foregoing family gatherings even at the point of one’s own death."
-------------
You can't really "sacrifice" something if you don't have a choice -- that's bullying or coercion or threatening or a million other words, but never sacrifice.
Shouldn't everyone be ethical? How does one get paid for saying that's her occupation?
May each of these two die alone.
You might want to investigate and promote the Baby Rico case that involves Fauci. Back in 2012, Fauci worked to kidnap about 60 babies with an experimental Phase 1 toxicity trial of AIDS drugs by working with child protective services to take away infants from mothers who did not want to participate in research. The story is in Steve Nagel's Substack: https://stevenagel.substack.com/
I suggest we fire Grady, and replace her with Freedom Fox. The put Grady in prison.
Fire the whole lot of them! Replace them with any mechanic, plumber, farmer, any tradesperson. I'll take the ethics of people who work with their hands over any academic with any "Dr." or Phd next to their name.
Yes!! Let's talk about Bioethics! When Bioethicists talk about their field they describe it as practicing "Good Stewardship" of the ignorant, unwashed masses by their educated, more sophisticated elites.
Like Pres. Obama's spokesperson said after pictures from his birthday party in 2021 revealed maskless attendees served by masked staff:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-york-times-reporter-faces-backlash-after-sophisticated-vaccinated-crowd-comments-after-ob
The same "sophisticated" elitism drips from the entire field of Bioethics. A very illuminating presentation of their work product can be found in this guide:
https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Public-health-ethical-issues.pdf
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics produced this guide to ethical public health policymaking in 2007. It is considered a gold-standard presentation of bioethics used by public policymakers internationally to help guide their decisions. It's guidance is still relevant and useful today, explaining much of what public health officials have relied upon to determine public policies. Subjects it touches on include obesity, tobacco and alcohol, infectious disease, equity and water fluoridation. That doesn't necessarily make it a good guide.
Public health policymakers can ignore evidence many accomplished experts put forward and assert their own flimsy stand-ins for evidence for as long as they want. And stand in their definition of ethics doing it. And have courts uphold their policies.. Judges go to the same types of parties like Obama has. Members of the same elite, sophisticated crowd. Who value what bioethicists have to say about public health matters.
Take the practice of water fluoridation. Very meager evidence of efficacy is asserted and upheld in the face of large bodies of evidence it's ineffective and unsafe produced by many accomplished experts. Upheld for over 75 years. Coercive public health actions that remove consent from the public, no opt-outs, judges haven't put a stop to it. They call water fluoridation ethical, following the "good stewardship" model.
I find Chapter 7, Water Fluoridation beginning on page 121 (153) useful in the context of community masking mandates. It all is useful to read to gain full context, and beginning on page 135 (167) is a section on Consent that gets to the principles that inform public policymakers on the ethics of coercive public health actions that remove the consent of the public, no way to opt-out.
Throughout the entire guide and even in the section on Fluoridation it gives voice to individual free choice. That it rarely honors in its final subject guidance. With water fluoridation it shares that even after over 60 years (in 2007, now over 75 years) of fluoridating water there's little compelling evidence that it is effective. It acknowledges that in lab studies some results have been promising, but clear scientific results have never been produced that show it works as claimed in a community setting. It also acknowledges that opponents of fluoridating water have produced lab studies showing harmful effects, including increased cancer, from fluoridated water, but they've been disputed by proponents of fluoridation and so there's no clear scientific results that shows it is unquestionably harmful. Earlier in the guide it makes the case that no ethical public policy should be made so coercive it removes consent unless it is proven to be safe and effective.
With regards to fluoridation it says that because there's no clear, compelling evidence on either side that nation's ought not make it public policy for ethical reasons. *But* it goes on to offer that if local communities wish to do so they may (like mask mandates). Then shifting the burden of proof onto opponents of fluoridation to shows clear, unquestionable scientific evidence it is unsafe. Violating the very ethics of the guide it purports to adhere to.
Apply this same reasoning to pandemic mitigation public policy, including mandatory mask mandates, policies that remove individual consent for a proclaimed collective public health concern. Know that water fluoridation has over 75 years of practice now in many communities, with no compelling evidence it is effective at preventing cavities (caries). But based on mere assertions of efficacy local communities fluoridate water. And because opponents aren't able to produce scientific evidence of harm that satisfies the proponents of fluoridation it is deemed ethical public policy at the local community level. With this model as a guide, local communities could continue with mask mandates for 75 years without any compelling evidence, dismissing all evidence of harms presented by opponents. And consider themselves ethical. Even "Good Stewards" of their citizens.
This bioethics guide proclaims its product represents the ideal of "Good Stewardship" that balances the competing interests of individual choice and freedom with the collective's public health and safety required sacrifices. In fact, it gives mere lip service to individual choice and freedom as it minimizes the value of it, while giving broad deference to presumptions of necessary collective sacrifices with little scrutiny. But because it gives any kind of voice to the individual it pats itself on the back for balancing the competing interests. It's mental masturbation for the creators of it, with multiple exclamations of King Solomon-like wisdom.
When one 'follows the money' of The Nuffield Council on Bioethics they'll discover that it is funded largely by Wellcome Trust (Glaxo-Wellcome, Big Pharma). Wellcome Trust is a peer influencer on public health policy of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Actually older and more esteemed.
Wellcome Trust is a WEF Zero-Covid Founder:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/how-are-companies-responding-to-the-coronavirus-crisis-d15bed6137/
Wellcome Trust was headed by Jeremy Farrar. His name has surfaced in Anthony Fauci's emails concerning the origins of CV, communications strategies like spin (propaganda) and censorship, along with suggested pandemic protocols. Farrar resigned from the UK's SAGE SPI-B pandemic advisory board because its recommendations weren't totalitarian enough for his liking: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/02/jeremy-farrar-sage-scientist-quits-over-concerning-uk-covid-picture-reports
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-sir-jeremy-farrar-quits-sage-advisory-group-amid-concerning-coronavirus-transmission-rate-in-the-uk-12458214
More insights into Farrar's values:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/jeremy-farrar-interview-wellcome-trust-director-says-i-m-not-a-great-believer-in-the-power-of-prayer-9986626.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08x20jh
Jeremy Farrar's values - Zero Covid totalitarianism - align with the World Health Organization's, recently selected as their top scientist:
World Health Organization names Sir Jeremy Farrar as Chief Scientist
https://www.who.int/news/item/13-12-2022-world-health-organization-names-sir-jeremy-farrar-as-chief-scientist-dr-amelia-latu-afuhaamango-tuipulotu-as-chief-nursing-officer
But before Farrar left Wellcome Trust, another one of the organizations he helped fund like Nuffield Bioethics Council is Wellcome LEAP, led by former DARPA and Big Tech Manipulation, Deception and Surveillance Specialist Regina Dugan:
https://wellcome.org/news/wellcome-leap-announces-leadership-team
https://www.sgtreport.com/2021/07/un-wellcome-leap-target-children-is-this-huxleys-brave-new-orld-eugenics/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regina_E._Dugan
The field of Bioethics has many tentacles that extend outward from it. Carrying with them the same contemptuousness of the hoi polloi that the self-imagined elite among us hold to most all areas of public policy.
Bioethics informs and directs public policymaking on important issues, like influencing the development and ethics of newgenics, biotech, transhumanism, public health policy:
Buck v. Bell, American Eugenics, and the Bad Man Test:
Putting Limits on Newgenics in the 21st Century
Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality, January, 2020
https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1622&context=lawineq
Buck v. Bell is an important SCOTUS decision that is overlooked today, even though it still stands today, only some of its sharper edges rounded off in Oklahoma v Skinner in the 1940's. Upheld as recently as 2001. Bioethics, embraced by practitioners of the pseudosciences that led to the practice of eugenics. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes penned, "Three generations of imbeciles is enough" to uphold the practice. In this piece by Walter Berns he touches on behavioral science manipulations and deceits. Which is The Science (TM) of pandemic NPI protocols:
Buck v. Bell: Due Process of Law by Walter Berns
Political Research Quarterly, December 1, 1953
https://sci-hub.se/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/106591295300600409
Masks, social distancing, quarantines, contact tracing, etc, none of that was based in medical science. All are behavioral science tricks and tools that are a part of the epidemiologists bag of tricks to change behaviors by changing perspectives of the ignorant masses to fit what their elite "good stewards" want them to believe. The chosen NPI was fear amplification. Because our "more sophisticated" betters said we suffered...suffered...from "optimism bias." So they had to "fix" our too optimistic perspectives:
https://www.wpr.org/what-optimism-bias-and-how-it-affecting-our-response-pandemic
Never mind that using behavioral science fear amplification as NPI to fix our optimism is the "Science of Totalitarianism":
https://web.archive.org/web/20210519003131/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/14/scientists-admit-totalitarian-use-fear-control-behaviour-covid/
Behaviorals Science applied as law is very dangerous to a free society. This piece from 1963 identifies the hazards:
Law and Behavioral Science by Walter Berns
Law and Contemporary Problems (Duke Law School), Winter, 1963
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2953&context=lcp
[The first 14 pages get into a game theory type application of behavioral sciences on judicial philosophy. In trying to understand the rulings of the Roberts court it could be speaking to the same philosophy. The final 14 pages are very informative and cautionary for the type of governance we are being subjected to today.]
Speaking of the Roberts-led SCOTUS, this is interesting to consider. Health Affairs is a very important and influential Behavioral health policy resource::
Health Affairs Journal - About
https://www.healthaffairs.org/about
"Health Affairs articles are cited by U.S. administration officials, U.S. lawmakers, and ministry of health leaders around the globe. Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle reference Health Affairs in drafting legislation. US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts cited the journal in his decision regarding the Affordable Care Act. In addition, Health Affairs is frequently cited by national media, including the Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, network television and radio, and NPR."
The same publication that informs Justice Roberts in his legal reasoning had this to say early in 2020 about masks: They don't work...but...the symbolism is needed:
Flu Masks Failed In 1918, But We Need Them Now
Health Affairs, May 12, 2020
https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20200508.769108/full/
Never mind that symbols are speech, the earliest form of speech, understood by the illiterate. Mandating speech is the other side of the same free speech coin that prohibiting speech/censorship is. Our First Amendment right. That a Chief Justice ignores. A right no more. Those who said masks weren't their hill to die on in 2020 were saying that the First Amendment wasn't their hill to die on, whether they knew it or not. And now many of those same people awakening to the threat of censorship all around us still haven't made the connection to their consent to mandated speech, symbolic masks, paved the way for prohibited speech. Because following the science of totalitarianism, behavioral science, is incompatible with free speech.
And Behavioral Science and Bioethics go hand-in-hand. Weapons of the "sophisticated" elites to manipulate and coerce the ignorant and imbeciles to do what they're told to do. Consent to totalitarianism manufactured by linguistic sorcerers. And Christine Grady, Mrs. Fauci is a very important player in this "fundamental change" descending on our nation and the world.
Another very important player in this fundamental change descending on our nation is Cass Sunstein. His Bioethical Behavioral Science is central to it. He likes piloting the cockpit of the big government drone over all things:
https://bluetent.us/articles/governing/cass-sunstein-biden-white-house-oira/
His book, "Nudge" led to the establishment of this "Nudge Unit", Social and Behavioral Science Team. Now known as the Office of Evaluation Services under the GSA:
https://behavioralscientist.org/executive-order-formally-establishes-us-nudge-unit/
https://oes.gsa.gov/
Sunstein coauthored the behavioral science fear amplification pandemic NPI plan – masks, lockdowns, contact tracing, social distancing, coercion, manipulation, etc:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32355299/
The UK and US behaviorism efforts, including pandemic related have been joined at the hip from inception. The UK has been more forthcoming about it, so you'll find a lot of references to efforts in both nations. This pandemic truly is a war for our minds with The Science (TM) as the main weapon:
Behavioral Science Vaccine Uptake White Paper:
obssr.od.nih.gov/sites/obssr/files/inline-files/OBSSR_VaccineWhitePaper_FINAL_508.pdf
Summary Tip Sheet:
web.archive.org/web/20210318065609/https://obssr.od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/COVIDTipSheet_Final_508.pdf
Behavioral Science study reinforcing White Paper above:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8195039/
Here's the plug-and-play app for those better and more sophisticated elites we're grateful to have coercing and manipulating us for our own good using Behavioral Science-informed propaganda campaigns. Masks. Vaccines. Gender. Climate. Race. Can be used for any issue du jour:
www.conservativewoman.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/sage.png
Above from the March, 2020 SAGE meeting, template applied to social distancing goal. Plug-and-play, can be used for masking, vaccination, any and all behaviorism: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/887467/25-options-for-increasing-adherence-to-social-distancing-measures-22032020.pdf )
The UK's pandemic behavioral science team, SPI-B, has been led by a radical Marxist, Susan Michie - described as such by her fellow Marxists who kicked her out of the Communist Party for being too much of a radical:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/25/government-scientist-has-advocated-covid-controls-member-communist/
https://www.gbnews.uk/gb-views/colin-brazier-what-were-the-bbc-thinking-asking-an-old-loony-left-winger-to-pontificate-at-a-moment-of-national-crisis/167608
Now she's the WHO's Chief Behavioral Scientist:
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/07/26/sages-communist-party-member-susan-michie-promoted-to-lead-whos-nudge-unit/
(Joined by Jeremy Farrar from Wellcome Trust now the WHO's Chief Scientist, as previously described. The WHO, led by leading totalitarians, as they seek to dictate international health public policies and emergency powers over nations. Nothing to see here. Move along.)
Sunstein's UK co-author, Richard Thaler and Nudge:
https://behavioralscientist.org/five-takeaways-from-our-conversation-with-richard-thaler-about-the-past-present-and-future-of-nudge/
Sunstein’s protege, Jessica Hertz, Obama administration to Facebook senior legal, to Biden administration back to Big Tech - Government inside Big Tech inside government, collaborating with propaganda and censorship efforts like those exposed in Twitter Files:
https://nypost.com/2020/10/01/joe-biden-hires-facebooks-jessica-hertz-for-transition-team/
https://www.vox.com/recode/22206646/joe-biden-jessica-hertz-facebook-staff-secretary-big-tech
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10086113/Bidens-staff-secretary-quits-Former-lawyer-Facebook-leave-White-House-coming-days.html
Now at Shopify as Counsel and on their DC lobbying team. Oh, Justice Sotomayer presided over her wedding:
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/ex-biden-facebook-attorney-joining-shopify-as-general-counsel-1
Sunstein has another important protege, Maya Shankar. She headed up the SBST under Obama. Left to become Google’s Chief Global Behavioral Scientist when Trump came into office:
https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/podcast/knowledge-at-wharton-podcast/power-nudges-maya-shankar-changing-peoples-minds/
Shankar coauthored the UN’s Behavioural Insights to Achieving Agenda 2030 (WEF Great Reset) – how we’ll be happy owning nothing eating bugs:
https://www.undp.org/publications/behavioural-insights-united-nations-achieving-agenda-2030
Shankar runs in interesting company - Chelsea Clinton and Kevin McCarthy’s BFF roommate, Frank Luntz.
https://ms.player.fm/series/in-fact-with-chelsea-clinton/changing-minds-with-maya-shankar-and-frank-luntz
Shankar describes behavioral science, aka The Science (TM) to the Council on Foreign Relations on how governments can impose policy with psychological manipulation:
https://www.cfr.org/event/behavioral-insights-policymaking
[Note: the article acknowledges that they can’t speak freely on how the behavioral sciences are being used by government to coerce and manipulate populations on the record, they save those conversations for behind closed doors]
Houston, we have a problem.
Sunstein has many protege's who've fanned out inside government, media and Big Tech. His wife is another key player. Samantha Power. Also a practitioner of behavioral science-informed propaganda and censorship. Focused on international relations, foreign policy, with a biotech twist.
Benghazi, Ukraine, Republic of Georgia, whatever she touches turns to sh*t:
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2015/june/16/samantha-power-liberal-war-hawk/
https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/an-american-double-standard-puts-the-caucasus-on-the-brink/
Some puff pieces on her. That didn't stand up to time well:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/land-possible
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/sep/07/samantha-power-former-us-ambassador-un-interview
Current Role:
https://web.archive.org/web/20221109145151/https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/speeches/nov-30-2021-administrator-samantha-power-foreign-policy-magazine-independent-media
USAID millions missing in Afghanistan:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/07/asia/us-afghanistan-spending-waste-intl-cmd/index.html
And the agency she heads up, USAID has its fingerprints all over manufactured pandemics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PREDICT_(USAID)
Color revolutions, totalitarian pandemics, energy and food crises, voting irregularity, all in a days work for applied Bioethical Behavioral Science.
Adam, there's a lot here in this comment thread that I wish I had the resources to get the associated records for. I have no doubt that the trails this information leads to are to high value actors in this unfolding global tragedy. I hope it inspires others to follow it to additional information that Opens The Books to the powerful actors in it. I'll happily share more research and information I've put together to admin and readers. Thank you for your work.