Category Archives: Propaganda

Three Narratives About The Massive Troop Presence In DC

Posted on by

NOQReport sums up different narratives about the presence of massive numbers of troops in DC:

“Right now there are two mainstream ideas as to what is really going on with Washington DC’s military control. The mainstream narrative is that it’s a natural reaction to the violence that occurred on the Capitol Building on January 6th. The problem with this theory is that there have been no credible calls for an armed protest on Inauguration Day. In fact, Conservative voices have been telling people to stay home and to NOT come to DC. The only credible report that I could find of ANYONE planning on showing up was the Boogaloo Boys, but they are so few in number, that would not warrant the 35,000+ troops on the ground.

On the Conservative side, there’s the claim that this is Donald Trump playing 5D chess, and that the military is there to arrest all of the Deep State who are traitors to the United States of America. They cite the fact that there are fences facing inward, which appear to be designed to keep people IN as opposed to OUT. Now, if that happens, that would be epic and a total Trump move. But is that the game plan, or is there something more sinister going on?

Could this be yet another setup by the Deep State to take out conservatives once and for all. Just as much of the Capitol Riots were designed as a setup to discredit the Conservative Movement, this could be yet another one. They are setting the stage that the Right is extremely violent, and the visual cue for that is the thousands of troops protecting our nation’s capitol. But what happens if there’s an attempt of violence that they thwart or actually allow to occur? This could justify the outright targeting and persecution of all conservatives, treated as an enemy of the state.”

Well, this is was always one of my great fears and the reason I didn’t vote for PDJT the first time around. I thought his whole presidency might be a Trojan horse to discredit conservatives.

I don’t think that now, having watched him for 4 years. And right now, I don’t think this is a set up. The other side is absolutely desperate and the infiltration of the Jan 6 rally, like the hacking of the election software, is a Hail Satan pass born out of sheer desperation at the persisting support for PDJT.

 

National Guard Chief Says 65,000 Soldiers And Airmen In DC Now

Posted on by

I came across this video in which National Guard Bureau chief Dan Hokanson says that 65,000 soldiers and airmen of the NG [3 times the number being reported in the media] are on the ground in DC.

Trump Incitement Timeline Fully Debunked

Posted on by

‘From CNN via DCPatriot:

“Evidence uncovered so far, including weapons and tactics seen on surveillance video, suggests a level of planning that has led investigators to believe the attack on the US Capitol was not just a protest that spiraled out of control, a federal law enforcement official says.

Among the evidence the FBI is examining are indications that some participants at the Trump rally at the Ellipse, outside the White House, left the event early, perhaps to retrieve items to be used in the assault on the Capitol.”
This reference to the crowd at the Ellipse is interesting because it appears that it was pioneer alternative news provider Alex Jones who organized the crowd at the Ellipse.
The observation that the movement to the Capitol came from the crowd at the Ellipse is seconded in this piece at USA Today:
Many of the rioters came directly from President Donald Trump’s “Save America Rally” that began hours earlier on the Ellipse, a park near the White House. Trump spoke to them for more than an hour, insisting that the election had been stolen.
USA Today’s timeline has the rally at the Ellipse starting around 6 am with some supporters arriving the previous night. It has the Save America Rally beginning at 11 am with speeches by Eric Trump and Don Jr. and Rudy Guiliani, followed by Trump at around 11.50 am.
The speech goes on for about an hour and during the time Trump urges supporters to walk down with him to the Capitol and tell Congress to do the right thing.
USA Today claims the protestors at the rally started the walk at the end of the speech at around 1 pm.
But Raheem Kassam has debunked this “Trump incitement” time-line. The speech was not easy to hear, was mostly a laundry list of election fraud with nothing new in it, and began late, so people wandered off before it ended toward the Capitol.
Kassam points out that the first protestors arrived at around 12.40 pm at the Capitol, a half hour before Trump ended his speech at 1.11 pm and over 76 minutes before any supporter could have made the 45 minute walk from the Ellipse to the Capitol following the speech. The outer perimeter of the Capitol had been breached and police chief Sund was calling for the National Guard before the President had even finished his speech. In fact, to do what investigators found them to have done, those who breached the Capitol would have had to have left the Ellipse before Trump began speaking.
The SGT Report published an eye witness account of the Ellipse rally and the walk to the Capitol, which contradicts the mainstream reports on several points.
Apparently the rally at the Ellipse was to run from 9 to 11, followed by another gathering at the North lawn of the Capitol building at 1.  This was announced at the website wildprotest.com which now brings up a 404 error sign.
Other participants have also mentioned the confusion arising from two planned events and the first one running an hour late.
The SGT Report account mentions young men with scary masks but Revolutionary symbols on the backs of their clothes boarding trains running into DC. It also mentions the unusual smell of pot at the Ellipse, but, other than that, nothing unusual about the crowd of mostly white but some Asian and a few black supporters.
He does observe that the earliest people to get to the Capitol were on average younger than the group at the Ellipse and they were the ones scaling the walls and pushing through the metal barriers. He saw smoke, smelled tear gas and heard ceremonial cannon fire but he saw no violence from the protestors and knew nothing about the entry into the Capitol until he heard it from someone else. Then he saw what he thought was an Antifa infiltrator breaking glass to enter the building. Later he heard that a woman had been killed.
As mentioned earlier, Alex Jones paid half a million to book the Ellipse and he said he was asked by Trump to lead the march. The secret service was supposed to call him out earlier to do that but he found that people had already gone on ahead.
“Jones also said he paid close to $500,000 to book the Ellipse, the park where Trump’s supporters initially gathered, and other areas near the Capitol. He said 80% of the money came from an unnamed donor.”
The second interesting point is that investigators are using a counter-terrorism strategy of picking up people who might be of concern in the future on very minimal charges. The targets mentioned in the piece are both Proud Boys leaders who were taken in on fairly innocuous infractions, such as destroying a BLM banner and making ominous online postings. Proud Boys is supposedly a far- right outfit that has picked up a reputation for standing up to BLM and Antifa, which, of course, means that in the mainstream narrative they are violent murderous fascists. I say supposedly because several savvy observers think PB are agents provocateurs themselves.
The final point made in the piece is that investigators are looking for evidence of any kind of command and control behind the protestors, which suggests that they don’t think that the more violent aspects of the rally were set off spontaneously by what Trump said in his speech, which is the mainstream narrative. They think there was a coordinated plan in motion, well before Trump even got to the protest.

Alex Jones Paid For Part Of Capitol Rally

Posted on by

I found this piece at the NY Post really interesting and possibly significant.

Alternative news pioneer, Alex Jones, of Info Wars fame, paid $500,000 of his own money to book either the Ellipse or another venue [it isn’t clear from the article] at the January 6 Capitol protest.

The idea was for Jones to lead the walk to the Capitol, but people were already on their way in the hundreds of thousands before he got there.

One of the things that participants noted was the disorganization of the event, from the poor quality of the audio that meant that Trump’s speech wasn’t easy to hear to the division of the crowd into two venues organized by different groups.

It looks from this piece as if Jones was one of the organizers.

Trump seems to have publicly praised Jones and invited him to organize.  So one thing I’d like to follow up on is why Jones  did not coordinate with the other organizers.

The second question I have is about the size of the crowd.

I got the impression when I watched the rally on videos on pro-Trump sites like The Gateway Pundit, The Donald, Conservative Treehouse, and Centipede Nation, that it was over half a million and maybe even a million, but public accounts of it are much more modest, usually saying something like 200 to 300,000. But that’s still vastly more than the official estimates before the event, which anticipated a maximum number of 80,000.

On India Today, an American Indian Republican official of some kind mentioned a figure in excess of a million, but I have not been able to find a printed transcript of the interview.

This is the first printed estimate I have seen which is close to my own observation.

Dominion Bludgeons Magazine Into Apology Over Fraud Charges

Posted on by

American Thinker, an online publication, has had to retract its articles charging Dominion with conspiring to steal the election from POTUS:

We received a lengthy letter from Dominion’s defamation lawyers explaining why they believe that their client has been the victim of defamatory statements.  Having considered the full import of the letter, we have agreed to their request that we publish the following statement:

American Thinker and contributors Andrea Widburg, R.D. Wedge, Brian Tomlinson, and Peggy Ryan have published pieces on www.AmericanThinker.com that falsely accuse US Dominion Inc., Dominion Voting Systems, Inc., and Dominion Voting Systems Corporation (collectively “Dominion”) of conspiring to steal the November 2020 election from Donald Trump. These pieces rely on discredited sources who have peddled debunked theories about Dominion’s supposed ties to Venezuela, fraud on Dominion’s machines that resulted in massive vote switching or weighted votes, and other claims falsely stating that there is credible evidence that Dominion acted fraudulently.

These statements are completely false and have no basis in fact. Industry experts and public officials alike have confirmed that Dominion conducted itself appropriately and that there is simply no evidence to support these claims.

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error. 

American Thinker, I read, has also disabled comments at its site, recently.

Things are getting darker by the day.

Who Incited The Killing Of Ashli Babbit?

Posted on by
From Summit.news:

A leftist radio host called for police to shoot Trump supporters less than an hour before Ashli Babbitt was shot dead at point blank range during yesterday’s chaos in the Capitol building.

Four Trump supporters were left dead following the bedlam that unfolded yesterday, with authorities only revealing that the other three had died from “medical emergencies.”

Shocking footage shows Babbitt, a 14-year Air Force veteran, being shot in the neck by a police officer who deliberately aimed at her before gunning her down.

 

Before the shooting, innumerable leftists were on Twitter demanding the police use lethal force to disperse Trump supporters, including some with sizeable platforms.

Shelagh Fogarty, a host on Britain’s biggest radio network LBC, responded to a video showing Trump supporters scuffling with Capitol Hill police with the words, “Shoot them.”

 

Fogarty tweeted out the demand for violence to her 88,000 followers.

After Fogarty was confronted about her tweet, she blamed “white supremacists” and subsequently claimed, ” I want nobody shot,” despite directly calling for people to be shot.

Retracted HCQ Study Muddled Ventilator & HCQ Use

Posted on by

Apart from the unverifiability of the data used, Dr. Steven Quay has pointed out a high-school-level error in the HCQ study co-authored by Dr. Sapan Desai (India’s answer to Neil Ferguson). The lead author is Mandeep Mehra, a Harvard professor.

The Mehra study has two variable inputs in it: Hydroxychloroquine and intubation with a ventilator.

The fact is buried in the paper and was likely missed by most readers.

What this means is that the increase in patient deaths could have been caused just as well by ventilator use. Actually, that has been the clinical experience of many physicians, given the nature of the hypoxia in Covid19, which seems to be a result of clotting in the lung. Ventilators are counter-productive.

Controlling for that mistake, HCQ, even in this unreliable study, is somewhat helpful.

Here, I should add something of which Dr. Quay is apparently not aware: HCQ is a zinc ionophore and should be used with zinc to get the excellent results that have been reported from all over the world.

No zinc was given in the Lancet study.

Lancet, NEJM Retract Covid-19 Papers Over Data Source Concerns

Posted on by

Update (June 5, 2020, 12.45 PM IST):

The Lancet editor-in-chief Richard Horton won the 2015 Friendship award given by the Chinese Government

and here’s more about him  from the Lancet website:

“He now works to develop the idea of planetary health – the health of human civilizations and the ecosystems on which they depend.”

The Spectator points out that Horton has been an unrelenting critic of the British government, blaming it for not doing enough, but has attacked any criticism of the Chinese government.

ORIGINAL POST:

This house of cards is tumbling down fast:

From  Statnews.com:

“The Lancet, one of the world’s top medical journals, on Thursday retracted an influential study that raised alarms about the safety of the experimental Covid-19 treatments chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine amid scrutiny of the data underlying the paper.

Just over an hour later, the New England Journal of Medicine retracted a separate study, focused on blood pressure medications in Covid-19, that relied on data from the same company.

The retractions came at the request of the authors of the studies, published last month, who were not directly involved with the data collection and sources, the journals said.

“We can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources,” Mandeep Mehra of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Frank Ruschitzka of University Hospital Zurich, and Amit Patel of University of Utah said in a statement issued by the Lancet. “Due to this unfortunate development, the authors request that the paper be retracted.”

A company called Surgisphere was responsible for the primary data on which the papers were based:

“As scrutiny grew, the authors on the paper not affiliated with Surgisphere called for an independent audit. In their Lancet statement Thursday, they said that Surgisphere was not cooperating with the independent reviewers and would not provide the data.

“As such, our reviewers were not able to conduct an independent and private peer review and therefore notified us of their withdrawal from the peer-review process,” the researchers wrote.”
Who is Surgisphere?

The Guardian on June 3 had this report:

“Data it [Surgisphere] claims to have legitimately obtained from more than a thousand hospitals worldwide formed the basis of scientific articles that have led to changes in Covid-19 treatment policies in Latin American countries. It was also behind a decision by the WHO and research institutes around the world to halt trials of the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine. On Wednesday, the WHO announced those trials would now resume.

Two of the world’s leading medical journals – the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine – published studies based on Surgisphere data. The studies were co-authored by the firm’s chief executive, Sapan Desai……

…A search of publicly available material suggests several of Surgisphere’s employees have little or no data or scientific background. An employee listed as a science editor appears to be a science fiction author and fantasy artist whose professional profile suggests writing is her fulltime job. Another employee listed as a marketing executive is an adult model and events hostess, who also acts in videos for organisations…..Until Monday, the “get in touch” link on Surgisphere’s homepage redirected to a WordPress template for a cryptocurrency website, raising questions about how hospitals could easily contact the company to join its database….

..Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”..
…In 2008, Desai launched a crowdfunding campaign on the website Indiegogo promoting a wearable “next generation human augmentation device that can help you achieve what you never thought was possible”. The device never came to fruition…
…Desai’s Wikipedia page has been deleted following questions about Surgisphere and his history, first raised in 2010…..
…The Guardian has since contacted five hospitals in Melbourne and two in Sydney, whose cooperation would have been essential for the Australian patient numbers in the database to be reached. All denied any role in such a database, and said they had never heard of Surgisphere. Desai did not respond to requests to comment on their statements.
…Another study using the Surgisphere database, again co-authored by Desai, found the anti-parasite drug ivermectin reduced death rates in severely ill Covid-19 patients. It was published online in the Social Science Research Network e-library, before peer-review or publication in a medical journal, and prompted the Peruvian government to add ivermectin to its national Covid-19 therapeutic strategy…
…The New England Journal of Medicine also published a peer-reviewed Desai study based on Surgisphere data, which included data from Covid-19 patients from 169 hospitals in 11 countries in Asia, Europe and North America. It found common heart medications known as angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers were not associated with a higher risk of harm in Covid-19 patients.”

The Guardian report picked up the analysis from James Todaro at Medicine Uncensored.

Todaro shows that Surgisphere does not appear anywhere in Internet Archive records, and its portfolio of past cases is thin to non-existent, made up mostly testimonials and PR releases.

Errors in Surgisphere’s database that Todaro points out include:

Reporting 73 deaths from in Australia, when Australia had only a total of 67 deaths by April 21.

Claiming to have detailed patient records for 63,315 patients in the USA, when the total number of Covd-19 patients in the USA was 66,000.

Providing  specific African data that would mean that over 40% of all patient deaths in Africa took place in Surgisphere-related hospitals with the sophisticated cardiac monitoring technology needed to collect such data.

What is amazing is not how this Desai shyster conned the world, but how these supposedly top-notch science journals and brilliant research scientists never bothered to check their sources for research that would have such a monumental impact.

We had the fraud Neil Ferguson. Now this.

On second thoughts, Desai almost deserves a medal for showing up how flimsy and pretentious the whole academic publishing industry is.

Added (June 5, 12.36 PM):

I have added an excerpt from  Surgisphere’s response below:

“Our studies, including that published in The Lancet, use a registry, with data obtained from electronic health records (EHR). In our hydroxychloroquine analysis, we studied a very specific group of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and have clearly stated that the results of our analyses should not be over-interpreted to those that have yet to develop such disease or those that have not been hospitalized. We also clearly outlined the limitations of an observational study that cannot fully control for unobservable confounding measures, and we concluded that off-label use of the drug regimens outside of the context of a clinical trial should not be recommended.

In so doing, we join agencies including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as well as several other observational studies reported in the NEJM, JAMA and the BMJ, each of which have pointed to either no benefit of the drug regimens using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine or even a signal of potential harm (also see this paper). The Brazilian CloroCovid-19 Study on chloroquine diphosphate was recently stopped in Brazil due to the noted safety hazards associated with this drug.

Our COVID-19 research was not funded by any drug company, private or public donor, or political organization. Our research collaborators on the piece for The Lancet devoted their time through personal funds and resources because they saw the urgent humanitarian need and opportunity to inform rapidly-evolving pandemic responses.”