Christine Todd Whitman Interview Shows Everything Wrong with GOP

 Own Goal.

So we often hear people desribe mistakes made as 'own goals' but i think it's appropriate here to discuss the subject at length before getting into the topic. So we'll look at two sports: soccer and basketball.

So imagine you're a soccer player and you've got the ball and your runnning the ball towards the goal.You're feeling like a G.O.D because none of the opposing teams are getting anywhere near you.  As you close in on the goal, the goalee is waving his arms at you and eventually tries to charge you. You expect this from a goalie because that's their job. But you are running like a G.O.D and one goalie isn't going to stop you. After all, you outran the entire opposing team. 

Finally you shake the goalie and boom, ball into the net. GOAAAAAAAAAAALLL.

Victory!

Yet there is a lot of booing going on. Why? Members of your team catch up to you and they are mad as hell.  It then dawns on you. You put the ball into your own teams goal and scored a point for the opposing team. It never occured to you that the reason that you were running like a G.O.D is because the opposing team was happy to let you score a point for them.  You were so blinded by your G.O.D status that you failed to notice that the goalie was your OWN TEAMMATE who was trying to get you to stop. 

No, you were too hung up on yourself to realize that you were playing the wrong side.

This is the institutional GOP. They are the player thinking that they are running like a G.O.D because they are running the ball into their own goal. The base of the GOP is the lone goalie trying to warn the party that they are going in the totally wrong direction.

Another thing to note is that in soccer game scores are very low. Single digit low. an own goal may be the ONLY goal of the game. Even if a gam manages to get to 3, an own goal could be anywhere from 30 to 100% of scores made. Own goaling is a devastating thing in soccer.

Imagine a similar scenario in basketball. In basketball scores often reach 100+. A single "own goal" would be 2-3% of the the total score. One would think that in such a small percent, relative to soccer wouldn't impact the game. Yet how many basketball games are determined by a single shot before the buzzer? So indeed even though an "own goal" in basketball would appear to be inconsequential and one could argue that the rest of the game has far more of an impact on actual wins, in the end, when the game is close that own goal could very well be the difference between winning and losing. 

This is also a reflection on the establishment GOP. They have been own goaling in the basketball sense so often that they thought it was inconsequential to the final  outcome. They own goaled on business, immigration policy, education policy, right to bear arms policy, homosexual marriage, etc. 

The current GOP is essentially what the Democratic party was maybe 15 years ago and maybe more like 20.  For all their talk about Reagan, the GOP of the Reagan era wouldn't recognize 2021 GOP. 

Which brings us to the topic. I don't usually watch MSM. When I do watch it, it is because it's on somewhere. In this case I saw Christine Todd Whitman being interviewed by a "Journalist" where she made a bold lie of a statement that went unchallenged because she was own goaling and they were happy to allow her to do so. She said:

I think the country does better with two strong parties, two major parties, a center left and a center right. And the Republicans have clearly been captured by Donald Trump. I mean those who still identify as Republican. If you look at the trends in the voter registration, indepenents are what's growing, then come Democrats and Republicans come after that. And a lot of those independents are Republicans who feel lost. The party has gone away from them.

So the first myth is that you have a "center-right" and a "center left" party system. We do not. A Pew paper shows how much has changed:

"Center" may have been descriptive of 1994 politics but it most certainly doesn't describe 2017 and I'll guess that that the polarization is far greater now.  But it's important to look at these graphs in terms of what Whitman thinks is the issue. Indeed if you limit your view to 2004 and 2017 you'll see a huge jumo in partisanship on both sides.

In the above I overlay the 2004 and 2017 charts. the lines show the medians for each party. Indeed both Democrats and Republicans "went to their corners" between 2004 and 2017 even though it's clear that "liberal" democrats outnumber conservative Republicans. So Whitman cannot be correct in thinking that this growth in independents is only due to the Republican party being taken over by Trump. But lets look at the comparison between 1994 and 2017:

You should note here that the Republican median has barely moved relative to the Democrat median.  So while there has been a shift to the right there has a been a FAR FAR FAR greater shift in the Democratic party. A generous conclusion to draw from this comparison is that we have a center-right party and a FAR left party. If that is the case then Whitman and her ilk are woefully ignorant as to what the Democratic party actually is. If they think the Democratic party is "center-left" then the Republican party will simply drift left out of ignorance rather than calling out the Democratic party for what it appears to be: Far, FAR left.

More importantly, look at how many Republicans fall at the 1994 Democratic median. It's about 30%. In contrast, if 10% of Democrats fall at the 1994 OR 2017 Republican median that's a "large" number. This shows that it is indeed the case that for a large portion of the Republican party, they are the Democrats of yesteryear. 

So for someone like me who could be described as a "1994" Democrat in the vein of Barbara Jordan, I do not recognize or support the current Democratic party and hence find myself more often supporting a Republican because the "moderate" Republican is most like the old Democrat.

This is what Whitman is clueless about. It's not Trump.  A GOP that continually own-goals and capitulates to a party that is clearly far left is of no use to it's supporters. Trump was a warning shot to the establishment GOP that the own-goaling needs to stop. Whitman simply wants to keep own-goaling and  Democrats will give her all their platforms to do so. 

Absolute Power Corrupts

Warning: "N-word" usage

So a few years ago I noted that Ras Baraka was now mayor of Newark and that he should deal with the crime in the city.  The reason I posted that was because as a son of a particularly "radical" man, he had the opportunity to show Newark and other black cities what so called "pro-black" governance is like. 

Well, one thing I considered was that such leadership would act a fool. Why? One reason is that a lot of people have no clue what it's like to have actual governing responsibility and the restrictions and compromises necessary in a constitutional republic. The other reason is that since a lot of "pro-black" people have power issues, as in, they really just want power, once they get access to power, they start doing things that they complained about when they were on the outside. Unfortunately, Baraka fell down this particular hole.

One of the worst things to do is to give near unlimited power to someone who believes themselves to be "right" and who feel they are doing whatever it is they want to do "for their own good". 

Let's examine this article by Michael Tracy:

From the outset, a pressing question — still yet to be adequately answered — was how exactly these Emergency Orders would be enforced on a practical on-the-ground level. Were police officers being directed to issue summonses and make arrests? If so, under what authority? The diffused patchwork of laws in the US made this difficult to ascertain in any kind of comprehensive way.

I have said repeatedly that one should consider that when one passes a law, that you are in effect voting to kill someone for not complying. Are you sure you want that?

Even if one believed that certain emergency measures were justified under the circumstances, the potentially perilous implications for civil liberties during that period were unmistakable. State authorities had been vested with vast new power to surveil and monitor citizens, regulate their behavior, and punish them for non-compliance — and yet our knowledge of how these authorities were actually deploying their powers was severely limited. Widespread closure of courts further complicated the situation.

You would think that the descendants of enslaved Africans would be particularly sensitive to the use of state power to regulate the behavior of citizens. 

You would think.

The data makes clear that within the March — May 2020 time frame, Newark Police went on a tear charging people with novel interpretations of crimes. One of the statutes they cited to bust people, APP. A:9-49(A), is defined as:

Commit[ing] any unauthorized or otherwise unlawful act during the threat or imminence of danger in any emergency that jeopardizes the health, welfare and safety of the people

Abusing a law in order to regulate citizens. Under the watch of the son of a "black radical".  

Interesting.

Here are some examples of “unauthorized or otherwise unlawful acts” which allegedly contributed to “jeopardiz[ing] the health, welfare, and safety of the people” that police accused people of committing:

• Sitting in park

• Sitting and talking to others

• Sitting on milk crate

• Visiting with no legitimate purpose

• Hanging out

• Being in the street in the company of another

• In street in the company of others

• Sitting on bench smoking

• Encouraging others to not social distance

• Standing outside enjoying the weather

• Socializing with another

• Not Social Distancing

• Standing without mask

These violations are punishable by up to six months in prison and a fine of $1,000.

Read that list. Now I absolutely refused to live by those "rules". Mind you I don't smoke or sit on milk crates but really. Under "pro-black" leadership police were fining people for standing without a mask.

Think about that. This is what Dr. King fought for: Black mayors fining citizens in a largely black city for standing without a mask.

On April 16, 2020, a woman was charged by police with violating another statute, 2C:24-7.1A1, defined as “recklessly engag[ing] in conduct which creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person.”

Her violation was described by police as: “did knowingly endanger other citizens by no having a face mask as per governor executive order to have one to quell the high rate of covid-19 exposure.” [All typos in these descriptions are police errors]

Enforcing the "white man's rules" eh Baraka?  

See, where I live, police didn't do that bullshit. I'm not going to say that they did NO bullshit, but they didnt' do THAT bullshit. But in that black city with a pro-black mayor? Fine these niggas.

I'm sure it was for their own good.

On March 30, a man described as Black was charged with “CONGREGATING WITHOUT MAINTAINING A DISTANCE OF 6FT, AND WITHOUT A DESTINATION, IN VIOLATION OF THE GOVERNOR'S ORDER.”

Negroes cannot congregate without the express permission of their owners the governor and must have papers showing they have permission to have left their plantation.

On April 27, a man described as Black allegedly “failed to obey governor's exec. order by taking part in non-essential travel & failing to social distance.”

Negroes are only allowed to travel if they have permission papers from their owners. Negroes still cannot congregate.

I asked a spokesperson for Phil Murphy, Alyana Alfaro Post, what she thought of so many people being ensnared by the criminal justice system for the crime of defying the Governor by doing things like standing outdoors. She responded in typically banal fashion: “Throughout the pandemic, local law enforcement has enforced executive orders and issued citations when they deem appropriate, as they would with regard to any other state law.”

"Local law enforcement". Meaning all that BS falls at Baraka's feet.  

A man named Richard Brandt was cited for “walking on n. 6th street not wearing a mask or gloves in viiolation of exec. order 107” — right near his residence — on April 27.

He had been with his wife, going for a walk. Brandt told me: “We were by ourselves, she had her mask on. I had my mask in my hand.” Then two cops drove by them in a squad car and stopped specifically to give him the ticket. Brandt said of the main officer, “I think he was a newbie. I’m telling him I’m with my wife, I’m not around anybody. It took him a long time to write it up… The new guy was very nervous, he was almost perspiring giving it to me.”

Do you know how many people where I live were walking all over the place without masks? Aside from me? Many. Not all. Not by a long shot but many. No police officer so much as slowed down.  Yet there in Newark with "Pro-black" mayor, is fining niggas left right and center.

This is your lefty black leadership in action. When they get the power, they go on the power trips.

The kicker of all this is that later on in May, Newark (like countless places in the US) hosted massive protests after the death of George Floyd — all of which flatly violated the COVID policies which had up until that point been so strenuously enforced. And these were state-backed protests; they were endorsed by both Governor Murphy and Mayor Ras Baraka, even though both officials had just spent months hectoring ordinary citizens for failing to “socially distance” or for gathering in small crowds outside. Baraka himself was a participant in a protest that violated his own Executive Order — the same order that had been cited by police to charge Newark residents:

Baraka even admitted as much to me at the time: “This is a violation, but we’re doing it anyway,” he said of the protest in Newark last May. (And elected officials wonder why people got fed up with the manifestly arbitrary nature of these enforcement measures.)

"We're doing it anyway"

I'm the captain now.

https://mtracey.substack.com/p/new-documents-show-police-charged

ADA not HIPAA

 Per yesterday's post, I recall that a lot of people are discussing how denial of service due to vaccination status would be a HIPAA violation. I don't think that is the case. As far as I have read, a business inquiring about your health status is not generally a HIPAA violation. If that business disclosed that information to a 3rd party then it WOULD be a HIPAA violation.

HIPAA is meant to keep your private medical information private. The issue in HIPAA is not whether the information can be known, it is about WHO is authorized to know this information. In regards to a public setting I believe this example would be most clear:

You are in line to get into a bar. Security at the bar asks you, in front of the line, about your vaccine status. You explain that you do not wish to have that information disclosed in public. He declares you to be "unvaccinated" and turns you away, in front of the crowd. That is a HIPAA violation as he disclosed your medical status to 3rd parties who have no business knowing it. The messy part here is that the act of turning you away (or letting you in) in front of 3rd parties may be inevitable, that is the mere asking the question in a public setting may be a HIPAA violation. 

Now the scenario may change if security takes each person aside, say into a room and asks the question. And with that being a one way room with access to both the interior of the building AND the exit, your disclosure as to whether you are vaccinated or not can reasonably be 'hidden" from 3rd parties as everyone saw you enter but only those really interested know you left (or not).  Of course this is a hypothetical. The point being that the ask is not in and of itself a HIPAA violation. And some people online think it is.

The actual relevant law is the ADA.  The ADA prohibits discrimination against those with actual or perceived disabilities.

(2 1) Disability

The term "disability" means, with respect to an individual

(I A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;

(ii B) a record of such an impairment; or

(iii C) being regarded as having such an impairment (as described in paragraph (3)).

Now note section 3: "being regarded as having an impairment". It could be argued that with the Fed and States acting as if having a normal immune system is an "impairment" one could argue that they have created a class of disability. I'm not saying that they have, only that it can be argued as such.

(2) Major Life Activities 

(A) In general

For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.

(B) Major bodily functions

For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions. 

(3) Regarded as having such an impairment

For purposes of paragraph (1)(C):

(A) An individual meets the requirement of "being regarded as having such an impairment" if the individual establishes that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under this chapter because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity.

(B) Paragraph (1)(C) shall not apply to impairments that are transitory and minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected duration of 6 months or less. [My underlines]

Now notice that "functions of the immune system" and "normal cell growth" and "respiratory".

Note that the provision notes actual or PERCEIVED physical impairment. So the fact that a business may "perceive" that you have an "immune deficiency disability" and denies you service based on that perception could be a violation of the ADA. And note that so long as you are not "vaccinated" you would have this "disability". So that 6 month exception would not apply.

Now onto public services:

Sec. 12131. Definitions

As used in this subchapter:

(1) Public entity

The term "public entity" means

(A) any State or local government;

(B) any department, agency, special purpose district, or other instrumentality of a State or States or local government; and

(C) the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, and any commuter authority (as defined in section 24102(4) of title 49).

(2) Qualified individual with a disability

The term "qualified individual with a disability" means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity.

 Subject to the provisions of this subchapter, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.

So no public entity, that's legal speak for your government agency can discriminate against you for having a disability including excluding you from services, programs and activities due to your  immune system being "unvaccinated" and therefore "disabled".

Now private entities:

The following private entities are considered public accommodations for purposes of this subchapter, if the operations of such entities affect commerce

(A) an inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as the residence of such proprietor;

(B) a restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving food or drink;

(C) a motion picture house, theater, concert hall, stadium, or other place of exhibition entertainment;

(D) an auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;

(E) a bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental establishment;

(F) a laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service, funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;

(G) a terminal, depot, or other station used for specified public transportation;

(H) a museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;

(I) a park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;

(J) a nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of education;

(K) a day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other social service center establishment; and

(L) a gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.

 And

Sec. 12182. Prohibition of discrimination by public accommodations

(a) General rule

No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.

(b) Construction

(1) General prohibition

(A) Activities

(i) Denial of participation

It shall be discriminatory to subject an individual or class of individuals on the basis of a disability or disabilities of such individual or class, directly, or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, to a denial of the opportunity of the individual or class to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of an entity.

(ii) Participation in unequal benefit

It shall be discriminatory to afford an individual or class of individuals, on the basis of a disability or disabilities of such individual or class, directly, or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements with the opportunity to participate in or benefit from a good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation that is not equal to that afforded to other individuals.

(iii) Separate benefit

It shall be discriminatory to provide an individual or class of individuals, on the basis of a disability or disabilities of such individual or class, directly, or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements with a good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation that is different or separate from that provided to other individuals, unless such action is necessary to provide the individual or class of individuals with a good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation, or other opportunity that is as effective as that provided to others.

(iv) Individual or class of individuals

For purposes of clauses (i) through (iii) of this subparagraph, the term "individual or class of individuals" refers to the clients or customers of the covered public accommodation that enters into the contractual, licensing or other arrangement.

In essence, no private business may deny access or services to "disabled" individuals. If the state wants to define those who are not vaccinated as somehow "compromised" then those persons are, under the ADA, disabled. Hence any attempts to deny service or otherwise create special rules for them is unlawful.

Now personally, I don't think we have to go here. This particular disease is not very bad when stacked up against some others out there. Yes, for those who are particularly vulnerable due to issues like diabetes, they may wish to look into the pros and cons of a vaccine. But to outright create a two-tier society (the masked and the vaccinated) is plainly unconstitutional and a violation of the ADA and Brown v Board abolishing separate but equal statutes. 

Maskless In The Casino

 I usually post my Casino and running stuff on my other blog but given the political and social nature of this particular post I'm going to put it here.  As you know The Ghost does NOT mask in public. I don't drive with a mask on. I do not walk the streets with a mask on. I do not run, bike or do any other strenuous activities with a mask on. I barely wear a mask at my [current] workplace. 

I posted the physics as to why anything short of a properly worn N95 respirator is totally not effective at blocking ANY viral transmission while also restricting your breathing.  So I won't repeat it here. So since I knew masks were safety theatre I only wore one when in private property. So for months I had been in and out of casinos regularly. For all I know I have been exposed to C-19 multiple times. Anyone who has been in a casino knows full well that the concept of "social distancing" is irrelevant because people walk around and behind you all the time, inhaling and exhaling.  People who win big jackpots whoop and hollar and then you walk right through the air they yelled into. If you are the paranoid type a casino is your next to worse nightmare after a subway ride.

One thing very positive to come out of this pandemic has been the elimination of indoor smoking in casinos. There are many places I simply will not go to because I decided I was not going to subject myself to second hand smoke for hours on end in the chase for money. My health comes first and I don't have to be there.  This may change back soon but hopefully not. Anyway onto the experience.

I don't do segregation. We, as in America, dealt with this decades ago, there is no separate but equal with the exception of bathrooms and changing rooms. We don't make people go through separate entrances. We don't restrict what parts of a room or building they may use. We do not set aside special hours for "those people".  

We don't do that shit.

And so I entered this casino which will not be named for various reasons. The outer doors showed the now familiar masked head picture so I went and put mine on. Private property. Fine. Upon entering everyone I saw had a mask on.  Ok. Fine. I went to the restroom and saw a "new" sign that indicated that per CDC mask requirements are dropped for Whites only. Sorry, no, "fully vaccinated".

Off came the mask. 

No. Don't ask and I'm not telling. And really you should stop talking about your personal health situation with anyone you work with or are doing business with. Once you agree to disclose the "expectation of privacy" thing usually goes out the window if it gets to court. 

Also, and this bears repeating: If you got a vaccine and you believe it works then the status of any other person is irrelevant. For example, you have your measles shot. Do you even THINK about whether the person next to you has also had the shot? No? And don't be so certain that they have. Think of the outbreak that happened in NYC.

If you got your vaccine and you are still worried about getting sick then WHY DID YOU GET IT? Do you regularly purchase things that you believe to be defective? 

So if you're in the "I don't want to be around the unclean unvaccinated" camp, you are an ass either way. Continuing on:

An elderly couple also saw the sign and commented that they had been vaccinated and that the sign says nothing about social distancing. They kept their mask on. Now personally I think their decision was dumb but I respect it. You do YOU. Me. No mas.

Here's the thing. You gotta be like the people who did the lunch counter sit ins. You walk in there like you belong. You take your seat in the "whites only" section like you belong. YOU are not doing anything wrong. THEY are doing something wrong by treating you like a diseased  second class citizen.

Do not go for it.

So I approached the floor entrance where there was a security guard with his mask on. He waved me by. Went past another one who was checking ID for age. I'm too grey for that BS. Pass him without incident too.

I wander around 90% of the floor and not a single employee said a thing. Kudos to them for that. Finally spotted my game of choice and noticed that another mask-less individual. And there we were, the only two people in the entire building who had no mask on like normal human beings.  We were surrounded by people wearing all manner of masks. Many of whom were wearing them incorrectly. 

Multiple employees walked past me while I was playing and didn't so much as stumble. 

Kudos.

Later I left without incident. Like a regular human being. I didn't try to avoid "security" or any floor staff and none of them gave me grief.

Now given the age demographics of people who go to casinos I was actually surprised that everyone still had a mask on. Thinking about it, the signs were not exactly in conspicuous locations.  Secondly I think there is still a lot of fear out there. The media really did a number on the public and it takes a particularly strong mind to not fall for it. Lastly, there are political considerations. Not a few people are keeping on masks in order to "not seem like a Republican." That's dumb but they can remain dumb as far as I'm concerned.

So this is the new segregation. Don't go for it. Do not accept second class citizenship. Kudos to the organizations and employees who see this and don't do it.

The Smoking Gun And A Zinc Discussion

 I'm sure many of the regular readers have come across the Medium article but if not I suggest you read it here. Prepare a drink, it's long, which is why I did not post it earlier. Read, then post, is my rule. I also suggest you save a copy as a PDF because of the penchant of website to remove or alter data based on pressure from outside groups. In terms of content, it adds a lot to my previous posting in regards to the lab origins of this virus. And makes it that much more likely to be correct.  Fortunately the article is not written in science jargon so anyone of decent intelligence can follow along.  That said there is one part I'd like to point out:

3) The furin cleavage site.

The furin cleavage site is a minute part of the virus’s anatomy but one that exerts great influence on its infectivity. It sits in the middle of the SARS2 spike protein. It also lies at the heart of the puzzle of where the virus came from.

The spike protein has two sub-units with different roles. The first, called S1, recognizes the virus’s target, a protein called angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (or ACE2) which studs the surface of cells lining the human airways. The second, S2, helps the virus, once anchored to the cell, to fuse with the cell’s membrane. After the virus’s outer membrane has coalesced with that of the stricken cell, the viral genome is injected into the cell, hijacks its protein-making machinery and forces it to generate new viruses.

I won't get into how this is probably the most damning portion of the paper but I think it underlines why there are two means of dealing with this (or any) virus. So as I discussed in my last posting on the subject, the "spike protien" which is nasty on it's own has multiple parts. The mRNA vaccines causes the hosts cells to create one of these parts, supposedly the S1. If the S1 is THE cause of the spike protien's ability to cause problems, then such a "vaccine", in my opinion, is not a good idea. But that's not really what this post is about. The interaction between the S1 and S2 parts of the spike is interesting.  Per the article I think we can look at it like a car with a manual transmission.

The S1 protein is like having a key to a car door (or any door but go along with me). The S2 portion is like turning the key. Have you ever had a key that fit into a keyhole but you either could not turn it OR you could turn it but the lock doesn't disengage?  Right. If a key cannot open a door, it's not all that useful. Similarly having the ability to turn the key is useless unless you have the right key.

The current mRNA vaccines, as I understand them is like having the key and not being able to turn the lock. We don't know if that makes the key useless in and of itself.  Now the S2 portion allows the virus to fuse to the cell membrane (open the car door) and allow entry of the  RNA.

One could argue that a natural infection would be preferable than an S1 derived vaccine because the host may develop the ability to recognize both S1 AND S2 as well as produce epitopes that can recognize variants of both which is likely why people exposed to SARS1 and other coronaviruses have T-cell responses to SARScov-19 even though they've never had it.

So we understand what the "vaccine" end of the "solution" is. It's very specific to one part of the virus. Now lets look at the other side. Theraputics. 

We know that vitamin D levels affects who gets bad Wuhan and who doesn't. We know it is because D modulates ACE2 receptors, low in some places high in others.  Hence a Vitamin D directly affects S1's ability to bind to a  cell. If it cannot bind it cannot cause disease. Period. 

But lets say that enough virus has entered the body and therefore simply on the basis of probability enough virus can bind to enough ACE2 receptors, S2 then opens the cellular door and the viral RNA enters. Now what?

Enter zinc, the manual transmission. 

We know that Zinc inhibits viral replication. (that link from 11 years ago).

Increasing the intracellular Zn(2+) concentration with zinc-ionophores like pyrithione (PT) can efficiently impair the replication of a variety of RNA viruses, including poliovirus and influenza virus. For some viruses this effect has been attributed to interference with viral polyprotein processing. In this study we demonstrate that the combination of Zn(2+) and PT at low concentrations (2 µM Zn(2+) and 2 µM PT) inhibits the replication of SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and equine arteritis virus (EAV) in cell culture. The RNA synthesis of these two distantly related nidoviruses is catalyzed by an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), which is the core enzyme of their multiprotein replication and transcription complex (RTC).

being unable to replicate is like a person who breaks into a car with a manual transmission but doesn't know how to drive one. You're not getting far and if you persist, the police (T-Cells) will eventually find you. If no police show up you will eventually abandon the vehicle because you can't drive it. Similarly a virus that breaks into your cell but cannot replicate has only left a mess of it's RNA in the cell, soon to be given the lysosome treatment.

More specifically, Zn(2+) was found to block the initiation step of EAV RNA synthesis, whereas in the case of the SARS-CoV RdRp elongation was inhibited and template binding reduced.   

Translation, in the presence of zinc, replication cannot be initiated. Virus is stopped dead.

And so we see that there is indeed a means to handle Covid without a vaccine. This information has been known for years.  I also think this zinc approach is probably better than a vaccine because it is not specific to any particular strain of virus. So any new variant that happens to be "better" at fusing with cells still has the zinc problem.  Until or unless the zinc barrier to replication is overcome  zinc should continue to be invaluable.

Why no discussion of this in the public by "health officials"? Well there is no money in zinc and vitamin D (though Quercetin is apparently quite a profit center). There is also no government power to be had.

DeSantis Opens Florida

While we have states bringing back segregation, Florida is doing the exact opposite. 

Declaring Florida’s COVID-19 emergency over, Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday signed an executive order invalidating all remaining local emergency COVID orders and signed a bill into law that bars businesses, schools and government entities across Florida from asking anyone to provide proof of a COVID-19 vaccination.

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article251123044.html#storylink=cpy

This is good. It is unfortunate that you need to pass legislation to prohibit something that shouldn't even be a thing in the US.

“I think folks that are saying that they need to be policing people at this point, if you’re saying that, you really are saying you don’t believe in the vaccines, you don’t believe in the data, you don’t believe in the science. ... We are no longer in the state of emergency.”

Exactly. Now I'm clear that I don't think the "vaccines" are that at all. Particularly given the overall mortality rate for C-19 and the demographic profile of most (90+%) of the victims. But lets play along.

As pointed out yesterday in the post about segregated Washington State, the purpose of a vaccine is to prevent illness. If the vaccine works and the most vulnerable are vaccinated and therefore no longer at risk, then there is no emergency and therefore everything should go back to normal. To say otherwise is to say that you do NOT believe the vaccine to be effective, in which case we have a right to ask what is the 'vaccine" for?

Now I have the answer to this and I've written about it but if you think it's "health" well, good luck with that.

The provision regulating so-called “vaccine passports” is tucked into SB 2006, a bill intended to update the state’s emergency powers in the face of a future public health emergency. The new law is effective July 1, but DeSantis also on Monday said he would sign an executive order invalidating all remaining local emergency COVID orders that are still in place after July 1 and suspend immediately any orders related to COVID-19 now.

Personally I think "right now" is better than July 1, but I get it. 

The measure would make it more difficult for local governments to respond to public emergencies by requiring any future emergency orders to be narrowly tailored and extended only in seven-day increments for a total of 42 days and gives the governor the authority to invalidate an emergency order. Currently, such orders can be extended indefinitely.

This needs to be done country wide. It is clear that 'emergency powers" have been abused during the past year and it should be a top priority to have these powers severely curtailed. There should be no such thing as an "indefinite emergency". Furthermore, legislatures should move to restrict the abuse of licensing agencies to use licenses to interfere with or shut down businesses without specific proof that the particular business has in fact been a cause of an issue. 

Under the new law, businesses, schools and governments may not require proof of vaccinations, and if they do, they can be fined up to $5,000 per incident. They may, however, institute screening protocols if it is “consistent with authoritative or controlling government-issued guidance to protect public health.”

No problem with screening protocols. 

Private companies can continue to require people to wear masks, but governments cannot mandate it, under the law.

This is the only part I have an issue with. On the one hand I agree that private property means the owner can set the rules of being on it.  However,if the state is going to prosecute business owners for not baking a cake for a gay couple then it should also tell businesses to kick rocks with mask mandates for anyone who is not an "at-will" employee.

“It feels a little bit like the governor is spiking the ball at the 10-yard line,” he said. “Obviously the virus is still with us. And local governments ought to be able to require indoor mask usage when appropriate.”

These people do not know the meaning of the term "endemic". By their logic we should be wearing masks because Influenza and TB are still around. 

Opponents also warned the bill could lead to First Amendment challenges because it strips private businesses and educational institutions of their ability to control their right to associate with unvaccinated people, which under law are not a protected class.

Ahh "Protected Class" the unconstitutional gift that keeps on giving. I have argued many times that the concept of a protected class in a constitutional republic that guarantees all citizens equal protection under the law is untenable. Either all citizens are equally protected and covered under law or you have a tiered society in which some people have more rights than others. So that they would even mention "unvaccinated' as some "class" of citizens who are "unprotected" should be a major red flag.

“I don’t know many people who are going to get on a cruise if they don’t have the security of knowing that the other people on that cruise with them, and in that close environment with them, have also been vaccinated,’’ warned Rep. Omari Hardy, a West Palm Beach Democrat, during House debate last week.

First of all the status of the other passenger is none of your business. Secondly, if you are THAT concerned how about YOU not take the cruise. It's entirely your right to NOT take a cruise. Nobody can force you to take a cruise. You do so freely. Thirdly, if you believe the vaccine to be safe and effective, the status of some other person is irrelevant.  Besides on the Diamond Princess we had people who shared the same room in which one person was sick and the other was not. This was before anything was known about therapeutics or any "vaccine".  

I recently ran a race in VA. A month leading up to it I stopped going to casinos because I consider that a relatively high risk area. Not just for COVID. We are grown up people who can make decisions about our own health without government nannies. If you think an activity is too risky for your tolerance level, you don't do it. Imagine me demanding that everyone in the casino meet my requirements of health before THEY could enter so that I can play without "worry".  Nonsense.

These people are not well in the head. Melodramatic people who are private citizens can be ignored. Melodramatic people who have power are a problem.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article251123044.html

The New Left Crow: Now Featuring Medical Segregation

 Not too long ago we held these truths to be self-evident that 'separate but equal" is a contradiction in terms. Now however, under the new Left Crow we have the return of segregation.  Now I had to check to make sure this wasn't an April Fools article. It isn't.

Updated guidelines for spectator events and churches in Washington now allow venues to designate "vaccinated sections" within their facilities that can be seated at full capacity. 

Under the new guidelines, spectators must present proof they're fully vaccinated in order to be admitted to the vaccinated-only section. Vaccination cards, a photo of a vaccination card or an immunization record will be accepted as proof.

So segregation AND "freedom papers". 

Physical distancing won't be required in vaccinated-only sections. People seated in those sections may be seated directly next to other groups. Vaccinated spectators are still required to wear face masks unless actively eating or drinking. 

Children between two and fifteen years old may present a negative COVID-19 test result that was taken within 72 hours of admission. Children under the age of 2 need to be accompanied by a vaccinated adult. 

 So they told you that once a vaccine was out you could get "back to normal". Now you got the vaccine (sucker) and you stil have to wear a mask?

WTF people. This is classic bait and switch. And plenty of people are going to "go" for this because they are so desperate and compliant.  Seriously, the entire point of getting the "vaccine" is so that you can move about among people who aren't without "worry". If the "vaccine" doesn't allow you to do that, particularly if you do not have certain underlying conditions, then what's the point of getting it?

BTW you do realize that a negative COVID test (which the CDC itself knows is mostly BS because it relies on too many amplification rounds), is only valid as of the time it was taken and that 3 days later you can then pop positive? 

Vaccinated spectators must enter facilities in a separate line from un-vaccinated ticket holders, according to the guidelines. 

Outdoor facilities may add vaccinated sections until their total capacity is at 50%, or 22,000 people, whichever is lower. Outdoor unvaccinated spectators cannot exceed 9,000 people, according to the guidelines. 

Colored cars and White cars on the train.  Drain the pool after the Negroes swim in it so the good clean white folks don't catch any Negro diseases. 

Religious and faith-based organizations may add vaccinated-only sections to increase overall capacity to 50% in Phase 2.

If you are a religious organization who implements this you deserve all the government tyranny you have coming.

Possible Chauvin Appeal?

In my last post about the Chauvin trial I said the following:

 The only way I see an appeal winning is if they can produce at least one juror who was going to acquit Chauvin but voted guilty due to the riots or potential threats to his or her life or property. If a juror comes out, on record saying this then I would absolutely expect the convictions to be thrown out

Recently one of the jurors decided to out himself and while he didn't say that he felt threatened and hence voted to convict, he did something that is, in my opinion, just as bad.

One of the jurors who convicted Derek Chauvin in the murder of George Floydon Monday defended his participation in a protest last summer in Washington, D.C., following online speculation about his motives for serving on the jury and whether it might be grounds for appeal.

A photo, posted on social media, shows Brandon Mitchell, who is Black, attending the Aug. 28 event to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech during the 1963 March on Washington. Floyd’s brother and sister, Philonise and Bridgett Floyd, and relatives of others who have been shot by police addressed the crowd.

Mind you, I don't think participating in a march is grounds for dismissing a juror. It's what comes next:

it shows Mitchell standing with two cousins and wearing a T-shirt with a picture of King and the words, “GET YOUR KNEE OFF OUR NECKS” and “BLM,” for Black Lives Matter. Chauvin knelt on Floyd’s neck for 9 minutes, 29 seconds last May as Floyd said repeatedly that he couldn’t breathe.

Mitchell, 31, acknowledged being at the event and that his uncle posted the photo, but said he doesn’t recall wearing or owning the shirt. 

Well see, this points to a prejudging of the defendant. This guy should not have been on the jury.  And lets' be clear, he is straight up lying about "not recalling" having or wearing the shirt. You don't just accidentally purchase such a shirt. It ain't a white T from the Dollar Store.

But worse:

Mitchell said he answered “no” to two questions about demonstrations on the questionnaire sent out before jury selection.

The first question asked: “Did you, or someone close to you, participate in any of the demonstrations or marches against police brutality that took place in Minneapolis after George Floyd’s death?” The second asked: “Other than what you have already described above, have you, or anyone close to you, participated in protests about police use of force or police brutality?” 

He lied on a state form. The legal consequence of that, as stated clearly on the form is a charge of perjury. And that could be a felony.

So first, this juror should be charged. This wasn't some small detail. It was a lie that directly impacted the case. And I would think that an appeals court should examine this closely. This is one known juror. It is reasonable to think that he is not the only person who has lied.

Remember, a conviction on the charges requires a unanimous jury. If even one juror thinks that Chauvin should not be convicted of any or all charges then that's what happens. There is reason to believe that a fair juror may not have chosen to convict (even though I think the state met its standard).

This guy may have handed Chauvin a get out of jail card.

 https://www.wkrg.com/national/chauvin-juror-defends-participation-in-washington-protest/

A Vascular Disease

As regular readers know, here at the Ghost we do facts and data. When we said Zinc is effective for Influenza and Wuhan, we posted the papers. When we said that Quercetin is effective, we posted the papers. When we told you that masks were ineffective, we showed you the physics. When we told you about the effectiveness of vitamin D, we posted the data. We have been wary of the recent "vaccines" because they have not been fully tested and some are possibly very dangerous because they tell the body to produce a protein that is actually deadly to the body. This post is about further evidence of this.

Now, if you recall there are a set of CV patients who have had fatigue as their major symptom. Often this fatigue is not accompanied by or resultant of any respiratory disfunction. I have been very curious as to why this is. Now we have an answer.

The paper, published on April 30, 2021, in Circulation Research, also shows conclusively that COVID-19 is a vascular disease, demonstrating exactly how the SARS-CoV-2 virus damages and attacks the vascular system on a cellular level. The findings help explain COVID-19’s wide variety of seemingly unconnected complications, and could open the door for new research into more effective therapies.

Note that this paper is asserting that Covid is a vascular disease rather than a respiratory disease. 

“That could explain why some people have strokes, and why some people have issues in other parts of the body. The commonality between them is that they all have vascular underpinnings.”

Lungs have a lot of small blood vessels. Kidneys have a lot of blood vessels.

In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls. [my underlines]

Special attention to the underlined portion. The spike protein itself can cause disease. Are bells ringing yet?

No? Well look here from the CDC:

Screenshot in case they change the text at a later date:

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give instructions for our cells to make a harmless piece of what is called the “spike protein.” The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19.

"harmlesss what"? How exactly do they know it is "harmless"? Given the number of adverse reactions, "harmless" would be a relative term.

Anyway, back to the topic.

"The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to mitochondria (organelles that generate energy for cells), causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented."

For those who don't know, mitochondria are the "powerhouse" of the cell. If they go, well you're going to be very tired.

So now we can understand why there are people reporting fatigue sans other symptoms. Furthermore, what is "long-COVID" may in fact by remnants of these spike proteins continuing to do damage to mitochondrion.

Now lets go back to a point about vitamin D and the ACE2 receptor. From the NIH:

It has been known that angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is the main host cell receptor of COVID-19. ACE2 is expressed in type II alveolar cells of the lungs, absorptive enterocytes from the ileum and colon, esophagus upper and stratified epithelial, kidney proximal tubule cells, myocardial cells, bladder urothelial cells, and epithelial cells of the oral mucosa (Zou et al. 2020; Xu et al. 2020). The high expression of ACE2 could be a potential risk factor for infection routes of COVID-19. 

And now:

Vitamin D has been known to play a critical role in the immune system. Vitamin D receptor has been expressed in multiple organs and tissues including the heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, nervous system, intestine, bone, parathyroid gland, cardiovascular system, and myocardium (Prufer et al. 1999).  

So they BEEN KNOWN that vitamin D plays critical immune roles in the very systems affected by Wuhan and yet they have NOT to this day, told you to take it or at a minimum to get your levels checked. And to add insult to injury got you to stay indoors for weeks and months so your body couldn't make its own. But now they have a vaccine to give you.

n human with primary and secondary kidney disease and in mice with diabetes, increased ACE2 expression was demonstrated (Ye et al. 2004; Lely et al. 2004). Vitamin D treatment was shown to inhibit ACE2 expression in the kidney (Ali et al. 2018). 1,25-(OH)2D3 exhibited renoprotective effect by decreasing ACE1 and ACE1/ACE2 ratio in streptozotocin-induced diabetic nephropatic rats (Lin et al. 2016). In other words, vitamin D treatment can suppress ACE2 expression in kidney tubule cells, thereby preventing COVID-19 entry into the cell in diabetic patients and protecting the kidney.

So for the Kidneys reducing ACE2 is beneficial. Known since 2018.

Vitamin D deficiency is an important risk factor in ARDS as well as in many diseases. A single high-dose preoperative treatment with oral vitamin D was reported to prevent ARDS by reducing postoperative pulmonary vascular permeability index (Parekh et al. 2018). A study showed that vitamin D exhibits direct protective effect on alveolar epithelium, and decreased the death of the type 2 alveolar epithelial cells in lipopolysaccharide-induced ARDS mouse model; also, supplementation of vitamin D before the oesophagectomy prevents ARDS by reducing alveolar capillary damage, in clinical setting (Dancer et al. 2015). Another study demonstrated that vitamin D treatment was shown to have protective effect on the lungs by inhibiting renin, ACE, and Ang II level, and increased ACE2 level expression in acute lung injury model in animal (Xu et al. 2017). Calcitriol (1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3) may enhance the expression of ACE2 by pronouncedly impact on ACE2/Ang(1–7)/MasR pathway (Cui et al. 2019).

In the lungs, increased ACE2 is beneficial. Vitamin D is not a one trick pony.

So the question is why, given how much info has been known about vitamin D, Zinc and Quercetin, has this information not been heavily promoted to the public?  Why has any alternative to "vaccine" been viciously repressed?

These vaccines, which may be free to you as in immediate "out of pocket" but are not at all FREE, could not get emergency authorization IF there was an effective therapeutic available. If there was, the regular testing process, which could take years, would apply. There's no money in that. So the state and private industry has colluded, at a cost of many lives, to prevent alternative treatments so that two things could happen:

1) The companies get paid. 

2) The state could assume powers, particularly in western countries that they otherwise could never get via elections or legislative means.

Years ago I asked how many American citizens was Hillary Clinton willing to have killed for her "immigration policies". Let me expand that. Back in 2001 it was a conspiracy theory to say that certain members of the government, knew at least some of the 9-11 hijackers, and they "allowed" 9-11 to happen for their own ends. But the thought that US officials would allow nearly 3000 people to die for political or economic reasons, was too much for most. Now think over 500k Americans have died of (for the sake of argument we won't get into "with") COVID. Much of that could have been prevented by getting people on the items mentioned above and the widespread use of Ivermectin as  prophylaxis. It should no longer be an "out there" thought to consider that the government will kill US Citizens for money and power and a lot of useful idiots would go along with it.

https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/