Revised and Expanded: Sin: More Dangerous Than the Coronavirus, part eleven

As has been noted in previous parts of this series, the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus, which is part of the plandemic devised at Event 201 in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, New York, on Friday, October 18, 2019, the Feast of Saint Luke the Apostle, has enabled pro-abort, pro-perversity pantheistic statists to become a veritable caste of latter-day Stalinists. These arrogant tyrannical monsters have busied themselves by exploiting the plandemic to rule by executive fiat and to elevate non-elected scientists and medical advisers to positions of such unquestioned authority that anyone who dares to question their judgments, refutes their manufactured “evidence,” or exposes their crimes against God and man must be subjected to immediate “cancellation” by the high priests and priestesses of Big Technology. 

At the Root of It All: Red China

Not that it matters to the presidential usurper named Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., or to the so-called World Health Organization, more and more evidence continues to be amassed that Xi Jinping’s Red China is at the root of the whole plandemic in an effort to wage global warfare against the West to transform it into the image of a repressive Chinese Communist state.

The following images depict the exact Red Chinese military strategy, translated by the whistleblower of Wuhan, Dr. Li Meng Yan, that is being employed by the plademicists as they execute with exquisite intricacy the details of their “Global Reset of Humanity”:

 

(A man fluent in the Chinese language assures me that these images are real and that the text reads the same in Chinese and in English. Whistleblower Dr. Yan has exposed this strategy:  Dr. Li Meng Yan.)

The description found in the image just above is a devastating summary of exactly what we are facing at this time as one statist monster after another in the United States of America and elsewhere in the supposedly “free” world imposes ever more draconian restrictions and never cease to move the “goalposts” so that the “normal” of the past will come to replaced by a “reset” at the cost of genuine human rights, including those of life, liberty, and property. Red China is engaged in genetic warfare, which is solely responsible for all that has followed, including the plandemicists' plans to change election laws because of "lethal" virus in order to rid themselves of President Donald John Trump so that there could be a "reset" of Chicom-American relations as well as the "great reset of humanity."

The nefarious Dr. Anthony Fauci, of course, is forever changing his story as to when we can take off those stupid masks and return to “normal” as it is his job to continue to keep us under some kind of statist supervision and monitoring so that we will come to resign ourselves to the fate his Red Chinese allies have in store for us: to become nothing other than expendable wards of the civil state, whose monstrous statists want “dissenters” to toe the line on the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus, the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn, the agenda of sodomy and the other perverse vices that flow from unnatural vice that not even Saint Peter Damian, whose feast we celebrate tomorrow, Tuesday, February 23, 2021, could have imagined possible over 1050 years ago, “palliative care”/hospice, “brain death” and the vivisection of vital bodily organs from living human beings to be transplanted in the name of “organ donation” and “giving the gift of life” (by carving up a living human being, of course), the starvation and dehydration of innocent human beings, explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, the corruption of Big Pharma and many, although not all, of its medicines, the whole regime of “vaccinations” that produce all matter of short-term and long-term side-effects, including death within a relatively short time of administration and/or at a later time when a vaccine’s genetic modifiers make the recipient a candidate for “palliative care,” and almost anything else that our censorious lovers of tyranny decide to mandate for belief and acceptance without question. In others, Fauci has helped to unleash a massive effort to transform the United States of America into Red China by means of executive fiats, most of which have passed judicial muster in the name of “following the science,” and his own ever-changing and quite transparent efforts to teach us dummies that our “independent spirit” must yield to whatever the “experts” say must be done, and to call to mind a catch phrase of the fictional Agent 86, Maxwell Smart, he is “loving every minute of it.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, now says that we may have to continue wearing masks until sometime next year, 2022:

Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci told CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday that it is "possible" Americans may still need to wear face masks in 2022, even as the country could approach a certain "degree of normality.

While Fauci noted he can't predict when the U.S. could return to the way it operated during pre-pandemic life, he believes that, by the end of the year, the United States could have "a significant degree of normality beyond what the terrible burden that all of us have been through over the last year." 

"As we get into the fall and the winter, by the end of the year, I agree with [President Biden] completely, that we will be approaching a degree of normality," Fauci said. "It may or may not be precisely the way it was in November of 2019 but it’ll be much much better than we’re doing right now." 

However, Fauci stressed that it is just an estimate and that "a lot of things can happen to modify that."

"That’s the reason why we’ve got to be careful," Fauci added. "Because you have variance that you need to deal with. There are so many other things that would make a projection that I give you today on this Sunday, wind up not being the case six months from now."

Fauci explained that the community prevalence of the coronavirus will be the determining factor as to when Americans will not need to wear masks, noting that he would like to see the level of transmission drop to a baseline so low that there is a "minimal threat that you will be exposed to someone who is infected." 

"If you combine getting most of the people in the country vaccinated with getting the level of virus in the community very, very low, then I believe you are going to be able to say you know for the most part we don’t necessarily have to wear masks," Fauci said. "When it goes way down, and the overwhelming majority of the people in the population are vaccinated, then I would feel comfortable in saying you know we need to pull back on the masks, we don’t need to have masks." (Fauci says it is possible Americans may be still be wearing face masks in 2022.)

I, for one, have lost track of how many times Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the swamp creatures that former President Donald John Trump should never have enabled the way that he did as he, the former president, fell into the trap that the plandemicists had set for him during Event 201 on October 18, 2019, has contradicted himself while explaining to the public with a straight face, accentuated at times by a smirky smile that exudes a condescension of a power-drunk statist, that he is only “following the science." However, there are those who have kept track of Fauci's flips and flops and other kinds of intellectually dishonest gynmastics:

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci’s often inconsistent comments and mixed messages on the coronavirus pandemic are prompting renewed scrutiny as debate rages over reopening schools and businesses nearly a year after the lockdowns started.

“Dr. Fauci is a very good public-health official. His job is to advise policy makers and inform the public,” Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said on Tuesday. “But his job is NOT to decide what we can do, where we can go or which places can open or close And his job is NOT to mislead or scare us into doing the ‘right things.'”

“Why should we trust Fauci with a national plan? Back in March, Fauci famously told Americans, ‘There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask,'” wrote David Harsanyi in the National Review. “(Fauci now says we should wear two masks. No thanks, Dad.)”

Masks

Fauci in an interview on “60 Minutes” in early March of last year warned of “unintended consequences” of masks, saying “people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.” 

On masks, Fauci and former Surgeon General Jerome Adams – who also warned against buying and wearing masks in spring 2020 – said officials recommended against wearing masks early in the pandemic because at the time there was a massive shortage of PPE for medical workers who needed it most. Further, more evidence of asymptomatic spread of the virus later came out. 

Fauci later enthusiatically embraced wearing masks.

“What has changed in our recommendation?” Adams said in a White House briefing in July. “We now know from recent studies that a significant portion of individuals with coronavirus lack symptoms.”

Now, Fauci more recently has backed recommendations that Americans wear two masks instead of one if possible in order to keep the masks tighter on people’s faces. 

“If you have a physical covering with one layer, you put another layer on it just makes common sense that it likely would be more effective,” Fauci told NBC News last month. The CDC officially put out double-masking guidelines this month. 

Vaccinations

Another issue on which Fauci has adjusted his stances is on exactly what level of vaccination is necessary for the U.S. to reach herd immunity to the virus. Fauci previously said the percentage of Americans who need to be vaccinated to reach that goal was 70% before revising that number up to higher than 80%. 

This inspired a story in the New York Times that accused Fauci of “quietly shifting” recommendations. Fauci then explained to the paper that he was taking public opinion polls into account in how he shaped his comments. 

“When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75%,” Fauci said, according to the paper. “Then, when newer surveys said 60% or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.”

He continued: “We have to have some humility here … We really don’t know what the real number is. I think the real range is somewhere between 70 to 90%. But, I’m not going to say 90%.”

And on returning to normal after Americans get their vaccines, Fauci has made several different comments that are not necessarily consistent. 

“It’s gonna depend very much on what the percent or level of efficacy of the vaccine is,” Fauci said in an interview of what post-vaccine life would look like with Bloomberg in August. “I would be very happy with 70-75% and I would be accepting of 50 to 60%.”

Fauci said continued public health measures would be necessary if the vaccine was on the low-end of effectiveness. But vaccines have been shown to be significantly more effective than anticipated – upwards of 90% – and Fauci now says Americans may need to wear masks until 2022. 

“Obviously, with a 90-plus-percent effective vaccine, you could feel much more confident,” Fauci said on CNN in November. “But I would recommend to people to not abandon all public health measures just because you have been vaccinated, because even though, for the general population, it might be 90 to 95% effective, you don’t necessarily know, for you, how effective it is.”

He added Sunday, also on CNN, that whether Americans wear masks into 2022 “depends on the level of dynamics of the virus that’s in the community… If you see the level coming down really, really very low, I want it to keep going down to a baseline that’s so low, that there’s virtually no threat – or not no. It’ll never be zero, but a minimal, minimal threat that you will be exposed to someone who is infected.”

More than 500,000 Americans have died from the coronavirus, which is an airborne disease that is not severe in most healthy people but can be deadly to older people and those with compromised immune systems. Fauci and his defenders have said their recommendations on the virus, which did not exist before 2019, have evolved as Americans’ understanding of the virus has evolved. They also say the strict recommendations reflect the vast number of deaths the virus is capable of causing and has caused. 

But those who are more critical of Fauci say he made pronouncements of “science” with far too much finality when the science was not in fact settled; has not leveled with Americans in some cases, including on the length of the lockdowns; and is not taking into account the mental and emotional toll of the virus lockdowns. 

Also this month, Fauci said on NBC’s “Today” that “by the time we get to April, that would be what I would call … open season” on vaccines and nearly full vaccination by “the middle and end of the summer.” The epidemiologist was then contradicted by President Biden, who said in a CNN town hall that vaccine would be available to all Americans by the end of July, and it would take longer than that to get doses in everybody’s arms. 

Fox News reached out to the NIAID for comment on Fauci’s messaging on masks, herd immunity, vaccines and when life may return to normal and did not receive a response. 

Lockdowns

Many Americans continue to wonder when the nation’s top infectious disease expert will tell them that they can resume life as normal.

One issue on which Fauci has remained more consistent is the reopening schools, which he has reiterated is possible before teachers get vaccines. In fact, he said this month on CBS that vaccinating every teacher before opening schools is “non-workable.”

Fauci on Sunday declined to say on CNN that grandparents who are fully vaccinated could see their grandchildren, saying “I don’t want to be making a recommendation now on public TV. I would want to sit down with the team, take a look at that.”

That prompted a rant from Meghan McCain on “The View.” 

“I was very frustrated when I saw this clip,” she said. “The fact that Dr. Fauci is going on CNN and he can’t tell me if I get the vaccine, I’ll be able to have dinner with my family… It’s terribly inconsistent messaging and it continues to be inconsistent messaging.”

Fauci answered some of that criticism on CNN Tuesday. 

“If I’m fully vaccinated and my daughter comes in the house and she’s fully vaccinated … common sense tells you that in fact you don’t have to be as stringent,” Fauci said. But, he added, “we want to get firm recommendations from the CDC” on what people can and cannot do when they are vaccinated. (Fauci's Mixed Messages and Inconsitences About Covid-19, Masks, Vacines, and Reopenings Come Under Scrunity.)

It is interesting that “the science” has a funny way of following the needs of elected and unelected statists without fail, is it not?

Anyhow, Anthony Fauci is saying now that two masks are better than one, meaning that such a “two mask” mandate or “recommendation” may have to be issued sooner rather than later, something that is already being enforced in the Federal courthouse and other buildings under the jurisdiction of the Southern District of New York in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, New York:

Visitors to Manhattan federal court and other buildings in the Southern District of New

York are now required to either wear two face masks or an FDA-approved N95 mask.

The double-mask requirement was included in the federal court district’s COVID-19 “phased re-entry plan” released on Feb. 11.

“You are required to wear either: (i) one disposable mask underneath a cloth mask
with the edges of the inner mask pushed against your face; or (ii) a properly fitted, FDA-authorized KN95 (or N95) mask,” the text of the plan states.

If you have a physical covering with one layer, you put another layer on, it just makes common sense that it likely would be more effective,” top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci said in January.

“Gaiters, bandannas, or masks with valves/vents are not acceptable face coverings. If you do not have the approved mask(s), a screener will provide one. No one will be admitted without the proper mask(s),” it adds.

Security guards at the court buildings — which include the Daniel Patrick Moynihan courthouse at 500 Pearl Street, the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse at 40 Foley Square and District Court in White Plains — will enforce the mask mandate.

The plan extends only to the federal courthouses in the district, but other federal court districts across the country can impose similar mandates if they choose to.

The CDC last week recommended double masking for more protection against COVID-19.

If you have a physical covering with one layer, you put another layer on, it just makes common sense that it i would be more effective,” top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci said in January. (Manhattan Federal Court Builidings Now Require Two Masks.)

What?

All these changing “recommendations,” mandates, executive fiats, monitoring, “contact tracing,” economy-killing lockdowns, the enforced isolation of the population, the isolation of the hospitalized and institutionalized from their family members and friends, are the constant histrionics and grim warnings that never come true for a weakened version of a genetic weapon that kills less than one percent of those infected with it even including the cases of those who suffer from preexisting conditions that predispose them to succumbing to the virus.

For this?

For this?

Wait!

Those who incant the “follow the science” mantra and expect us dumb sheepies to do the same cannot even seem to agree amongst themselves as to when it might be “safe enough” for daily living to resume without the monstrous restrictions.

Dr.Marty Makary, who teaches at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland, says that “herd immunity” might be achieved as soon as April if the program of genetically-modifying vaccines is able to get enough people encoded—excuse, me, “immunized” against a virus that is not a mortal threat to lives of most people:

A Johns Hopkins professor and surgeon says that the coronavirus could be “mostly gone” by April.

Marty Makary, who teaches at the university’s School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health, said in an opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal on Friday that daily infections have declined by 77 percent since January.

“There is reason to think the country is racing toward an extremely low level of infection,” Makary wrote. “As more people have been infected, most of whom have mild or no symptoms, there are fewer Americans left to be infected. At the current trajectory, I expect COVID will be mostly gone by April, allowing Americans to resume normal life.”

Vaccinations and the high number of people who have already been infected in the US — more than 28 million — could contribute to herd immunity in the spring, Makary said. Herd immunity occurs when enough people become immune to a virus, ending its spread. Makary also said it would protect against new strains of the coronavirus from spreading.

“When the chain of virus transmission has been broken in multiple places, it’s harder for it to spread — and that includes the new strains,” he said. (Johns Hopkins Expert Says Covid-19 Pandemic Could End by April. For an analysis of the damaged caused by the lockdowns, please see Dr. James Pierson's and Naomi Riley's co-authored commentary, "we are not safer at home," which is very good no matter their support of public concentration and indoctrination of all that is evil camps hat are sometimes referred as "public schools.")

Fauci says now that the plandemic will last until 2022, but Dr. Marty Makary says that it will end in a little over two months.

Perhaps some enterprising game show producer could create a new program for those who watch the idiot box that the late Newton Minnow, who served as the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission during the administration of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy sixty years ago, as a “vast wasteland, entitled “Who Wants to be An Expert?” This is all absurd.

Sadly, however, the constant hyperventilation over the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19 Coronavirus is all about programming us to follow the “experts” even when they disagree with one another so that will be become so mind-numbed as to do anything they say to get out of maze that was carved by those who designed it with no exit.

The likes of Anthony Fauci do not realize that illness and death are the consequences of Original Sin. It is impossible to live our lives without incurring risks as there is no guarantee that we might be injured or killed in a motor vehicle accident when we get behind the wheel of our vehicles and drive to a particular destination. The world has been fractured by Original Sin and is wounded all the more by the Actual Sins of men, including each one of our own. We do not throw away the keys to our motor vehicles because of the fear we might get into an accident, and we do not live in fear of any kind of sickness, including the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus, as the sickness we must fear at all times is that of Mortal Sin and thus of dying in a state of final impenitence.

Extolling Anthony Fauci’s “Battle” Against “Uninformed” Opposition to Science and the Larger Propaganda Effort to Mute All Dissenting Voices about the Plandemic

Anthony Fauci’s “scientific” expertise and even “courage” in the face of “ignorant” opposition to his omniscience was recognized with an award of one million dollars by a private Israeli foundation in a virtual ceremony:

Dr. Anthony Fauci has won a top international prize for his leadership in the coronavirus pandemic.

Fauci, who has served as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases under the last seven presidents, was awarded the $1 million Dan David Prize for his defense of science and advocacy of COVID-19 vaccinations now being used worldwide.

The private Israeli foundation also touted Fauci’s lifetime of leadership on HIV research and AIDS relief in the Monday announcement.

In a statement, the Dan David Prize credited Fauci with “courageously defending science in the face of uninformed opposition during the challenging COVID crisis.”

“As the COVID-19 pandemic unraveled, [Fauci] leveraged his considerable communication skills to address people gripped by fear and anxiety and worked relentlessly to inform individuals in the United States and elsewhere about the public health measures essential for containing the pandemic’s spread,” the awards committee said, according to NPR.

“In addition, he has been widely praised for his courage in speaking truth to power in a highly charged political environment.”

Fauci, 80, has recently acknowledged that it was difficult at times to work in the Trump administration, saying he took “no pleasure” in having to contradict the president, with whom he often clashed.

The Dan David Prize rewards breakthrough achievements in research, higher education and the sciences and the humanities.

It awards three annual prizes for past, present and future contributions to the field. Fauci was honored for his present work.

Foundation director Ariel David, son of the prize founder, said Fauci and other laureates “have probed how humanity has dealt with sickness and pandemics throughout history; they have provided relief, guidance and leadership in dealing with current outbreaks … and they are at the forefront of discovering new treatments that give us hope for the future in the ongoing battle against cancer and other diseases.”

The prizes will be awarded in a virtual ceremony on May 9, according to the Times of Israel. (Fauci Wins $1,000,000 for “Defending Science.)

Although a section on the currently available information about the fatalities caused by Pfizer BioNTech and Modern vaccinations for the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus is included later in this commentary, suffice it for the moment to state that the exultation of Dr. Anthony Fauci as a “defender” of “science” against uninformed opposition is just part of a larger, well-organized, well-funded and completely coordinate efforts among those in the private and public sectors, something that was documented very thoroughly by the courageous Dr. Joseph Mercola.

Antichrist’s Coordinated Effort to Program and/or Bludgeon Everyone to Accept His “Orthodoxy” While the Numbers of Coronavirus Cases Get Inflated by Phony “Tests”

Dr. Joseph Mercola, who forced the Monsanto corporation to list genetically modified organisms as ingredients in various food products, has amassed a wealth of information concerning how there is a coordinate effort to program, indoctrinate and/or bludgeon everyone alive at this time to accept whatever is considered “orthodox” doctrine by the minions of Antichrist at this time. Although Dr. Mercola does not write in supernatural terms, it is this poor sap of a writer that no one other than the adversary and his Antichrist could weave together such a complex web of forces designed to prepare everyone for the One World system of governance and religion that will be under his direct control:

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The Publicis Groupe, a leading PR firm, represents major companies within the technology, pharmaceutical and banking industries. These companies, in turn, have various partnerships with the U.S. government and global nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)
  • Publicis is a partner of the World Economic Forum, which is leading the call for a “reset” of the global economy and a complete overhaul of our way of life. As such, Publicis appears to be playing an important role, coordinating the suppression of information that runs counter to the technocratic narrative
  • The role of the free press is to counter industry propaganda. That role has been effectively subverted through advertising. News outlets rarely report on something that might damage their advertisers
  • Publicis connects to the drug industry, banking industry, NewsGuard/HealthGuard, educational institutions, Big Tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Bing, the U.S. State Department and Department of Defense, global technocratic institutions like the World Health Organization, national and global NGOs like the CCDH and the World Economic Forum, and dominating health websites like WebMD and Medscape
  • These connections, taken together, explain how certain views can be so effectively erased. The answer to this dilemma is transparency. We must expose the machinations that allow this agenda to be pushed forward.

Any strategy that successfully manipulates public opinion is bound to be repeated, and we can now clearly see how the tobacco industry’s playbook is being used to shape the public narrative about COVID-19 and the projected post-COVID era.

In 2011, after many years of raising awareness regarding genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and industrial agriculture, we decided we needed a new game plan. Educating people through our newsletter was great, but we realized the best way to expose Monsanto — a leading GMO advocate and patented seed owner at the time — was to get them to engage directly and ensure national attention.

To that end, Mercola.com funded the signature gathering in California that initiated Proposition 37, the right to know what’s in your food by ensuring proper GMO labeling. We spent more than $1 million for the Prop 37 initiative, plus several million dollars more for GMO labeling initiatives in other U.S. states in the following years.

This initiative forced Monsanto to engage with the public directly to defend their toxic products and dangerous business practices, all while receiving national coverage in the process. 

The Monsanto Case

Monsanto spent tens of millions of dollars attacking anyone in their way, but they did so indirectly, just like the tobacco industry did before them. This is the core take-home of what I’m about to describe next.

They used a public relations team to do most of their dirty work — paying scientists and academics to voice their “independent opinions,” influencing scientific journals, and getting journalists and editorial boards to write favorable and influential pieces to help them maintain their lies and influence minds.

Still, while the spending of tens of millions of dollars to influence voters resulted in a narrow defeat of Prop 37, the new, widespread awareness of GMOs, pesticides and industrial agriculture eventually led to Monsanto’s demise.

In 2013, in a last-ditch effort to salvage its tarnished image, Monsanto hired the PR firm Ketchum. As noted in a HuffPost article by Paul Thacker,1 “Monsanto hit reboot with Ketchum,” which “created a campaign called GMO Answers, and used social media and third-party scientists to offer a counter narrative to allay concern about Monsanto’s products.”

The GMO Answers’ website is set up to allow professors at public universities answer GMO questions from the public — supposedly without remuneration from the industry. But over the years, evidence emerged showing that these academics are far from independent, and often end up getting paid for their contributions via hidden means, such as unrestricted grants.

University of Florida professor Kevin Folta is one prominent example described in my 2016 article “Scientific American — Another Monsanto Bedfellow.” In that article, I also review how GMO Answers co-sponsored a panel discussion about GMOs in March that year with the media and partnerships division of Scientific American.

At the time, Jeremy Abatte, vice president and publisher of Scientific American, insisted the event was not a Ketchum event but a Scientific American event. Few bought his reasoning though, and many ended up filing Scientific American into the chemical biotech shill category.

Having purchased Monsanto at the end of 2016, Bayer continued the strategy to rely on PR firms for public acceptance. In the article2 “Bayer’s Shady PR Firms: Fleishmanhillard, Ketchum, FTI Consulting,” U.S. Right to Know reviews the many deception scandals involving these firms. A key discovery was evidence showing “there are objective strategies to silence strong voices.”

After investigating the strategies used by Monsanto and Bayer, we can now see that the same playbook is being used by Big Tech and Big Pharma to shape the public narratives about COVID-19 and the Great Reset. Again, a central facet of these campaigns is to silence critics, in particular those with large online followings, including yours truly.

I have been publicly labeled a “national security threat” to the U.K. by Imran Ahmed, a member of the Steering Committee on Countering Extremism Pilot Task Force under the British government’s Commission for Countering Extremism and the chief executive of the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).

According to Ahmed, I and others who question the safety and necessity of a COVID-19 vaccine may be prone to violent extremism. This defamatory statement clearly has no basis in reality whatsoever. Rather, it’s part of the propaganda aimed at destroying the opposition — in this case the opposition to the technocrats driving the Great Reset agenda, which spans across social, economic and health related sectors.

As reported by the National Vaccine Information Center, which was also on the CCDH list of national security threats:3

“The anonymously funded CCDH also has an office in Washington, D.C. and the defamatory publicity campaign created in December 2020 was designed to not only discredit NVIC’s four-decade public record of working within the U.S. democratic system to secure vaccine safety and informed consent protections in public health policies and laws, but to destroy our small charity.”

Publicis Is an Organizing Force in the Great Reset Deception

Public deception is now being carried out at a mass scale, and the whole thing appears to be led and organized by another major PR firm, this time the Publicis Groupe, self-described as “one of the world’s largest communications groups,”4 which represents major companies within the technology, pharmaceutical and banking industries.

These companies, in turn, have various partnerships with the U.S. government and global nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Publicis itself is also a partner of the World Economic Forum,5 which is leading the call for a “reset” of the global economy and a complete overhaul of our way of life.6 As you will see, Publicis’ fingerprints can be found throughout the net of censorship and misdirection that is now being cast across the digital landscape.

The Publicis Groupe has manipulated what people think about commercial products for nearly a century. Over that century, they have bought or partnered with targeted advertising avenues, beginning with newspapers, followed by radio, TV, cinema and the internet. More recently, they’ve branched into Big Data acquisitions and artificial intelligence platforms.

To understand the power PR companies such as Publicis have today, you need to understand the role of the free press. While pro-industry advertising worked well for decades, there was still the irksome problem of the Fourth Estate, a term that refers to the press.

The problem for industry was that professional investigative journalists working for magazines, newspapers and broadcast outlets would write in-depth exposés, outing the truth behind deceptive advertising and countering industry propaganda with science, statistics and other documented facts — and when a free press with honest reporting based on verifiable facts actually does its job, ineffective or toxic products are driven off the market.

The answer that industry came up with in the late 20th century to combat truth in journalism was, pure and simple, to control the Fourth Estate with advertising dollars. News organizations will simply not run reports that might harm the bottom line of its advertisers.

By further partnering with the “big guns” of media — such as the Paley Center for Media — Publicis and its industry clients have been able to influence and control the press to restrict, indeed virtually eliminate, your ability to get the truth on many important issues.

Publicis, Big Pharma and NewsGuard

To start off this sprawling web of industry connections surrounding Publicis, let’s look at its connections to the self-appointed internet watchdog NewsGuard. NewsGuard rates websites on criteria of “credibility” and “transparency,” ostensibly to guide viewers to the most reliable sources of news and information.

In reality, however, NewsGuard ends up acting as a gate keeper with a mission to barricade unpopular truth and differences of opinion behind closed gates. Its clearly biased ranking system easily dissuades people from perusing information from low-rated sites, mine included. 

NewsGuard received a large chunk of its startup capital from Publicis. NewsGuard also has ties to The Paley Center for Media, mentioned earlier. For clarification, The Paley Center is composed of every major media in the world, including Microsoft, AOL, CBS, Fox and Tribune Media. One of its activities is to sponsor an annual global forum for industry leaders.7

NewsGuard is housed in The Paley Center in New York City. In November 2015, Publicis’ chairman of North America, Susan Gianinno, joined The Paley Center’s board of trustees.8

Leo Hindery,9,10 a former business partner of the co-CEOs of NewsGuard, Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz, is also a former trustee and director of The Paley Center. Taken together, NewsGuard has fairly influential connections to The Paley Center besides being a tenant in their building.

As mentioned, Publicis represents most of the major pharmaceutical companies in the world, and since so much of its revenue comes from the drug industry, it’s not far-fetched to assume Publicis might influence NewsGuard’s ratings of drug industry competitors, such as alternative health sites.

Publicis, Big Pharma, NewsGuard and Big Tech

Next, let’s add a layer of Big Tech into the mix. Publicis, which represents Big Pharma, not only has the ability to influence the public through NewsGuard, but it’s also a Google partner,11,12 which allows it even greater ability to bury undesirable views that might hurt its clientele. 

NewsGuard is also partnered with Microsoft, initially through Microsoft’s Defending Democracy Program.13 Through an expanded partnership announced in 2020, Microsoft Edge users gained access to NewsGuard for free, and Microsoft Bing gained access to NewsGuard’s data.14

Publicis, Pharma, NewsGuard, Big Tech, Government and NGOs

Expanding the web further onto government and NGO territory, we find that NewsGuard is also connected to the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Department of Defense and the World Health Organization. All three are listed as NewsGuard partners.15 NewsGuard is also partnered with:16

  • Public libraries
  • Schools
  • MSN
  • Bing
  • Trend Micro and many others

To summarize, the web around Publicis now includes international drug companies, NewsGuard, Google, Microsoft, the U.S. State Department and DoD, the WHO and the World Economic Forum. Mind you, this is not a comprehensive review of links. It’s merely a sampling of entities to give you an idea of the breadth of these connections, which when taken together explain how certain views can be so effectively erased.

Add in ‘Anti-Hate’ Group and Google-Trusted Health Sites

But we’re not done yet. NewsGuard’s health-related service called HealthGuard17 is also partnered with WebMD, Medscape and the CCDH — the progressive cancel-culture leader18 with extensive ties to government and global think tanks that recently labeled people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine as national security threats.

In 2017, WebMD was acquired by Internet Brands, a company under the global investment firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) umbrella. KKR also owns several other health-related internet brands. Since WebMD owned Medscape, it too now belongs to the KKR Internet Brands as well.

Together, HealthGuard, CCDH, WebMD and Medscape have launched a public service campaign called VaxFacts. The goal of the campaign is to “provide facts and tools to help consumers make informed decisions about vaccines,” WebMD reports.19

In tandem with that campaign, Google is funding fact-checking organizations to the tune of $3 million, with the aim of countering “vaccine misinformation,” and NewsGuard maintains a “Coronavirus Misinformation Tracking Center” that includes a “Top COVID-19 Vaccine Myths Tracker.”20

WebMD dominates health searches done through Google and shares user information with Google’s advertising arm and other third-party firms — a practice that is illegal in Europe.

What this means is DoubleClick, Google’s ad service, knows which prescriptions you’ve searched for on the site, thus providing you with personalized drug ads, and Facebook knows what you’ve searched for in WebMD’s symptom checker, as well as any medical diagnoses you received. I reviewed these findings in “WebMD and Healthline exposed Violating Your Privacy.”

Since most of its revenue comes from advertising, WebMD is far from an independent source of well-researched health news. For example, it has been caught shilling for Monsanto, publishing industry-friendly “articles” that are really paid advertisements known in the media world as advertorials.

Ten years ago, WebMD was also caught publishing a fake online depression screening test. In actuality, it was an advertising trick for the antidepressant Cymbalta, and there was no way for test takers to get a clean bill of mental health.

Summary

So, to recap, we find connections between the drug industry, NewsGuard/HealthGuard, educational institutions, Big Tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Bing, the U.S. State Department and DoD, global technocratic institutions like the WHO, national and global NGOs like the CCDH and the World Economic Forum, and dominating health websites like WebMD and Medscape.

Again, this is far from an exhaustive investigation of these kinds of connections. It’s merely a small sampling of readily obvious relationships. Toward the center of this web is the Publicis Groupe, the clients of which include major drug companies, Big Tech companies and financial institutions in more than 100 countries.21

By the way, Publicis also began investing in artificial intelligence technology in 201722 and partnered with Microsoft in 2018 to develop a global AI platform.23 It also purchased the data firm Epsilon in 2019,24 thereby establishing ownership of first-party data — a crucially valuable resource when it comes to the use of AI.

As detailed on its website, the firm’s expertise is concentrated within four main activities: communication, media, data and technology (including AI services), and all clients have access to its expertise in all of these areas.

While it’s easy to dismiss Publicis as just another ad agency, I believe it would be foolish to underestimate its power to organize the kind of coordination required to shut down vaccine concerns, anti-lockdown proponents and people trying to educate their fellow man about the dangers of the Great Reset, which is being brought forth as a “necessary” post-COVID step.

While these things may seem unrelated, they’re really not. As mentioned, the Great Reset involves everything — including health, education, government, economics, redistribution of wealth, business practices, environmental “protections” and much more.

What Can You Do?

Everything we know is set to change, and those who disagree with the mainstream narrative are troublemakers that must be silenced, lest the plan get pushed off-track by an unwilling public.

The answer to this dilemma is transparency. We must expose the machinations that allow this agenda to be pushed forward. Part of that exposure is looking at the role of big PR companies like Publicis, which helps influence the public mind so that the technocrats can maintain their lies until it’s too late to do anything about it.

Remember we DEFEATED Monsanto and we will defeat this threat to our freedom too. We simply allowed the public to learn the real truth about the issues, and that triggered Monsanto’s collapse.

I am currently working with some of the brightest minds in the tech space —cybersecurity experts and billionaire philanthropists who are very well networked. These individuals are committed to preserving your personal freedoms and liberties. We are seeking to involve a massive redo of the entire internet that will not allow tech monopolies the ability to censor the truth because it happens to conflict with their advertisers.

There has been an increasing call for the decentralization of the Internet as expressed in this article on Coin Telegraph last week. This would mean that rather than web sites being hosted on centralized servers in one location their content would be stored and served from thousands if not millions of computers all over the world making it virtually impossible to censor or shut down.

We are seeking to implement a strategy that Tim Berners-Lee is proposing. For those of you who don’t know, Berners-Lee is the person that gave us the world wide web graphical interface of the internet, and he didn’t take a penny for it. Had he licensed this technology, he surely would be the richest person in the world today.

You can read more about Berners-Lee’s plan in this February 5, 2021, article in The Conversation,25 but essentially in involves data sovereignty, giving you control over your data and privacy. So, what can you do?  (The Great Reset and the Great Deception.)

Perhaps Dr. Mercola will be successful in the effort to cooperate in the project of doing an end run around the “world wide web” so that the high priests and priestesses of Silicon Valley, Big Pharma, the Deep State, the mainslime media, XiJinpingwood (sometimes called Hollywood) and the barons and baronesses of the American system of miseducation and ideological indoctrination (from pre-school to college/university/professional schools/seminaries), acting in full concert, of course, with the anti-apostolic “blessing” of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his fellow Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionaries, can be thwarted in their efforts to suppress both supernatural and natural truth and also repress those who proclaim and defend it.

However, the sad reality is this the time when there is a convergence of all the dark forces of Modernity and Modernism that are serving as perverse prophets to prepare the way for the coming of Antichrist. While efforts to try to blunt the effects of this convergence are commendable and might, please God and by the graces He sends us to through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, blunt their effectiveness for a while, too much damage has been done to the minds and the hearts of too many people for too long. Those steeped in the anti-Incarnational forces of Modernity that are reinforced daily by an alleged “pope” and his fellow Modernist minions need to be converted to the Holy Faith and to reform their lives. Neither “transparency nor internet are our solutions. The restoration of Catholicism is.

The Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus is the cornerstone or the linchpin of the entire “global reset,” which is why a concerted effort has been made by the plandemicists to rely upon the results of testing kits that are unreliable in se. The goal of this, of course, is to keep the masses in such states of agitation and fear that they will be good lemmings and get however many injections of the poisons masquerading as vaccines while giving our statist jailers the opportunity to keep moving goalposts indefinitely and to continue lockdowns for as long as they believe it politically expedient.

For several months, experts have highlighted the true cause behind the COVID-19 pandemic, namely the incorrect use of PCR tests set at a ridiculously high cycle count (CT), which falsely labels healthy people as “COVID-19 cases.” In reality, the PCR test is not a proper diagnostic test, although it has been promoted as such.

An important question that demands an answer is whether the experts at our federal health agencies and the World Health Organization were really too ignorant to understand the implications of using this test at excessive CT, or whether it was done on purpose to create the illusion of a dangerous, out-of-control pandemic.

Regardless, those in charge need to be held accountable, which is precisely what the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,1 or ACU),2,3 intends to do.

They’re in the process of launching an international class-action lawsuit against those responsible for using fraudulent testing to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic in order to implement economically devastating lockdowns around the world. I wrote about this in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun” and “German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation.”

FDA Demands Higher False Positives

An interesting case detailed in a January 21, 2021, Buzzfeed article4 that raises those same questions in regard to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is its recent spat with Curative, a California testing company that got its start in January 2020. It has since risen to become one of the largest COVID-19 test providers in the U.S.

Curative’s most popular PCR test differs from other providers in that it uses spit swabbed from the patient’s tongue, cheek and mouth rather than from the back of the nasal cavity.

In April 2020, the FDA issued an accelerated emergency use authorization5 for the Curative spit test, but only for patients who had been symptomatic within the two weeks prior to taking the test, as the data available at that time showed it failed to catch asymptomatic “cases.”

However, the test was subsequently used off-label on individuals without symptoms anyway, and the company has been urging the FDA to expand its authorization to include asymptomatic individuals based on newer data.

In December 2020, Curative submitted that data,6 showing its oral spit test accurately identified about 90% of positive cases when compared against a nasopharyngeal PCR test set to 35 CT.7

The FDA objected, saying that Curative was comparing its test against a PCR that had a CT that was too low, and would therefore produce too many false negatives.8 According to the FDA, the bar Curative had chosen was “not appropriate and arbitrary,” Buzzfeed reports.9

This is a curious statement coming from the FDA, considering the scientific consensus on PCR tests is that anything over 35 CTs is scientifically unjustifiable.10,11,12

From the start, the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended running PCR tests at a CT of 40.13 This was already high enough to produce an inordinate number of false positives, thereby labeling healthy people as “COVID-19 cases,” but when it comes to Curative’s spit test, the FDA is demanding they compare it against PCR processed at a CT of 45, which is even more likely to produce false positives.

The FDA’s concern is that Curative’s test is missing infections and giving infectious people a clean bill of health. However, in reality, it’s far more likely that the test is accurately weeding out people who indeed are not infectious at all and rightly should be given a clean bill of health. It seems the FDA is merely pushing for a process that will ensure a higher “caseload” to keep the illusion of widespread infection going.

When Are You Actually Infectious?

A persistent sticking point with the PCR test is that it picks up dead viral debris, and by excessively magnifying those particles with CTs in the 40s, noninfectious individuals are labeled as infectious and told to self-isolate. In short, media and public health officials have conflated “cases” — positive tests — with the actual illness.

Medically speaking, a “case” refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness. Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, “case,” has been arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of noninfectious viral RNA.

The research is unequivocal when it comes to who’s infectious and who’s not. You cannot infect another person unless you carry live virus, and you typically will not develop symptoms unless your viral load is high enough.

As it pertains to PCR testing, when excessively high CTs are used, even a minute viral load that is too low to cause symptoms can register as positive. And, since the test cannot distinguish between live virus and dead viral debris, you may not even be carrying live virus at all.

These significant drawbacks are why PCR testing really only should be done on symptomatic patients, and why a positive test should be weighed as just one factor of diagnosis. Symptoms must also be taken into account. If you have no symptoms, your chances of being infectious and spreading the infection to others is basically nil, as data14 from 9,899,828 individuals have shown.

Of these, not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive. This study even confirmed that even in cases where asymptomatic individuals had had an active infection, and had been carriers of live virus, the viral load had been too low for transmission. As noted by the authors:15

“Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2.

In the present study, virus culture was carried out on samples from asymptomatic positive cases, and found no viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.”

PCR Picks Up Dead Virus for Weeks After Infection Has Cleared

Because the PCR test cannot discern between live virus and dead, noninfectious viral debris, the timing of the test ends up being important. One example of this was presented in a letter to the editor of The New England Journal of Medicine,16 in which the author describes an investigation done on hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Seoul, South Korea.

Whereas the median time from symptom onset to viral clearance confirmed by cultured samples was just seven days, with the longest time frame being 12 days, the PCR test continued to pick up SARS-CoV-2 for a median of 34 days. The shortest time between symptom onset to a negative PCR test was 24 days.

In other words, there was no detectable live virus in patients after about seven days from onset of symptoms (at most 12 days). The PCR test, however, continued to register them as “positive” for SARS-CoV-2 for about 34 days. The reason this matters is because if you have no live virus in your body, you are not infectious and pose no risk to others.

This then means that testing patients beyond, say, Day 12 to be safe, after symptom onset is pointless, as any positive result is likely to be false. But there’s more. As noted in that New England Journal of Medicine article:17

“Viable virus was identified until 3 days after the resolution in fever … Viral culture was positive only in samples with a cycle-threshold value of 28.4 or less. The incidence of culture positivity decreased with an increasing time from symptom onset and with an increasing cycle-threshold value.”

This suggests symptomology is a really important piece of the puzzle. If no viable virus is detectable beyond Day 3 after your fever ends, it’s probably unnecessary to retest beyond that point. A positive result beyond Day 3 after your fever breaks is, again, likely to be a false positive, as you have to have live virus in order to be infectious.

Even more important, these results reconfirm that CTs above 30 are inadvisable as they’re highly likely to be wrong. Here, they found the CT had to be below 28.4 in order for the positive test to correspond with live virus. As noted by the authors:18

“Our findings may be useful in guiding isolation periods for patients with Covid-19 and in estimating the risk of secondary transmission among close contacts in contract tracing.”

Testing for Dead Viruses Will Ensure Everlasting Lockdowns

To circle back to the Curative PCR test, the company argues that the test is accurate when it comes to detecting active infection, and as CEO Fred Turner told Buzzfeed:19

“If you’re screening for a return to work and you’re picking up everyone who had COVID two months ago, no one’s going to return to work. If you want to detect active COVID, what the ‘early’ study shows is that Curative is highly effective at doing that.”

Again, this has to do with the fact that the Curative spit test has a sensitivity resembling that of a nasopharyngeal PCR set at a CT of 30. The lower CT count narrows the pool of positive results to include primarily those with higher viral loads and those who are more likely to actually carry live virus. This is a good thing. What the FDA wants Curative to do is to widen that net so that more noninfectious individuals can be labeled as a “case.”

In an email to Buzzfeed, Dr. Michael Mina, an epidemiologist at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, stated that using a CT of 45 is “absolutely insane,” because at that magnification, you may be looking at a single RNA molecule, whereas “when people are sick and are contagious, they literally can have 1,000,000,000,000x that number.”20

Mina added that such a sensitive PCR test “would potentially detect someone 35 days post-infection who is fully recovered and cause that person to have to enter isolation. That’s crazy and it’s not science-based, it’s not medicine-based and it’s not public health-oriented.”21

While the FDA has issued a warning not to use the Curative spit test on asymptomatic people, Florida has dismissed the warning and will continue to use the test on symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals alike. Only Miami-Dade County is reconsidering how it is using the test, although a definitive decision has yet to be announced.22. . . .

The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by the November 20, 2020, study30 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in any PCR-positive cases. I referenced this study earlier, noting that not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive.

But that’s not all. After evaluating PCR testing data from 9,899,828 people, and conducting additional live cultures to check for active infections in those who tested positive, using a CT of 37 or lower, they were unable to detect live virus in any of them, which is a rather astonishing finding.

On the whole, it seems clear that mass testing using PCR is inappropriate, and does very little if anything to keep the population safe. Its primary result is simply the perpetuation of the false idea that healthy, noninfectious people can pose a mortal threat to others, and that we must avoid social interactions. It’s a delusional idea that is wreaking havoc on the global psyche, and it’s time to put an end to this unhealthy, unscientific way of life. (Covid PCR Testing Fraud.)

Do not believe the statistics one might read daily of national or worldwide cases of the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus as they are grossly inflated in order to continue to instill fear into the hearts of men who have not the true Faith and who are thus prone to fear a mostly non-lethal virus rather than that fearing any thought of offending the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, by means of their sins and of dying in a state of final impenitence. We are witnessing a mass delusion premised upon lies wherein Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s injunction to fear not him who can destroy the body has been twisted into fearing anything that can destroy the body while caring nothing for the sanctification and salvation of their own immortal souls that He has redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday.

We have gone from one mask mandates to two mask mandates to lockdowns to quarantines to neighbors snitching on neighbors to people using disguises to “jump the line” to get their poisons to ever-shifting narratives as to when “herd immunity” can be achieved.

To keep the flames of fear burning brightly before the eyes of fearful men, therefore, it is incumbent upon the plandemicists to use every tool available to them to lie about the numbers of people infected with the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus and to “cook the books” about the numbers of those our public “health” officials claim have died from the virus even though incompetent care, the needless use of ventilators and the use of “comfort” (hospice) “care” have caused deaths in patients who might otherwise have been alive today.

Vaccination Fascism—and Death

One of the plandemic’s many ironies is that, as noted just above, the same plandemicists have gone to great lengths to attribute even deaths caused by motor vehicle accidents and falls inside of one’s own house to the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus are now doing all manner of intellectual gymnastics to deny that those who die within a short period of time after receiving the Pfizer BioNTech or Modern vaccinations have died from those vaccinations. It is in the plandemicists’ interests to deflate the numbers of those who have died from the vaccinations just as they have inflated the numbers of those infected with the virus and those who they claim to have died from it.

Consider the case of a woman who had been a newscaster in Detroit, Michigan, died the day after receiving the Pfizer BioNTech vaccination that her family and health care professionals are claiming was not caused by the vaccination:

A former Detroit news anchor who worked at the country’s first black-owned television station died last Tuesday — a day after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine, a report said.

Karen Hudson-Samuels, 68, who also worked as a producer and news director at WGPR-TV, was found dead in her home by her husband, Cliff Samuels, CBS Detroit reported.

Hudson-Samuels’ cause of death is not yet known.

“We suspect it may have just been a stroke but because of the normal side effects of the vaccine, it may have masked that,” Samuels told the news station.

“Hopefully we’ll know soon from the autopsy report,” he said.

Hudson-Samuels helped start the William V. Banks Broadcast Museum, the report said.

“When this museum got into the national registry, she was very, very proud,” her husband said.

Colleagues paid tribute to her life and work.

“She was just a beautiful person,” WWJ reporter Vickie Thomas told the news outlet.

“It’s such a huge loss for this community,” Thomas said. (Former News Anchor Dead One Day After Receiving Covid-19 Vaccine.)

Yes, anything but the vaccine must be blamed for deaths that occur within a short time of patients having been vaccinated. It is truly sad to see relatives grieving over the death of a family member convinced that the vaccines for the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus are “safe and effective.” Such is the mesmerizing effect of Big Pharma’s and the Deep State’s propaganda machine that is, as Dr. Mercola noted, part of an intricate web of “partners” whose job it is to convince us that white is black, that unreality is reality, and that falsehood is truth.

"Public health" officials around the country continue to deny any relationship between the Pfizer BioNTech or Moderna vaccinations and the sudden deaths of those who receive it, including in the case of two elderly religious sisters in a convent in northern Kentucky that had been closed off to the p public but is now seeing its members infected with the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid019/Coronarivus even after getting the "salvific" vaccinations:

Earlier this month WKRC Local 12 in Kentucky reported how two nuns died and 28 out of the 35 nuns at a Northern Kentucky monastery tested positive for COVID just two days after receiving their first experimental mRNA COVID injections.

The leadership of the monastery, as well as the local media, were shocked at the “outbreak” of COVID and resulting two deaths, because the monastery was not open to visitors, and the residents had not traveled outside of the monastery.

If ever one wanted to find a totally locked down facility with no exposure to the outside world, a monastery is about as locked down as one can get.

Nevertheless, following what we have consistently seen in our news reports where a religious belief in vaccines prevents one from thinking logically and even considering the possibility that these experimental, non-FDA approved mRNA injections could have anything to do with the deaths or COVID outbreaks, the experimental injections they received just two days before were never even considered to be the cause of the deaths or illnesses.

VILLA HILLS, Ky. (WKRC) – A COVID-19 outbreak at a Northern Kentucky monastery claimed the lives of two nuns as more than two dozen other sisters tested positive.

The question is: How did the coronavirus get in? During the pandemic, the sisters of St. Walburg closed the monastery to visitors and held no religious services in the hopes of staying healthy.

Until last week, that was the case.

“We were very shocked by it because we’ve been extremely closed-down. We have not gone anywhere to speak of, and we haven’t had visitors,” said Sub Prioress Nancy Kordenbrock.

Twenty-eight of the 35 sisters tested positive and, sadly, two of them have passed away.

“Both of them are elderly and had some health issues and were not able to compete with COVID,” said Kordenbrock.

Sr. Charles Wolking and Sr. Rita Bilz were both in their 90s and both were important women at the monastery.

The outbreak comes just two days after the sisters got their first COVID-19 vaccine shot. (Source.)

The local news media did their obligatory interview with the local public health bureaucrat to assure everyone this had nothing to do with the “vaccines”:

“This is actually way more common than you might think,” said Dr. Steven Feagins.

Dr. Feagins is the Hamilton County public health director. He says, in cases like this, the vaccine’s effect isn’t lessened; it just delays getting the second dose.

“Whenever you get it, you get it, so we consider the 21 days minimum,” said Dr. Feagins.

The sisters will receive their second dose of the vaccine in May. (Source.)

So there you go. Another story where there were no cases of COVID in an institution where elderly people lived, and where nobody was dying or sick, and then shortly after beginning the experimental COVID mRNA injections, people start dying and getting sick.

But according to the public health “authorities” this is “normal.”

And the vast majority of the public turns off their mind and any logical reasoning, and just continues to put their faith in the medical authorities, driven by their fear of the “killer coronavirus,” as the pro-vaccine believers continue to die and suffer. (Two Nuns Dead, 28 Covid Positive 2 days after experimental mRNA injections.)

No cause and effect between the vaccination and the deaths of the two religious sisters and the sickening of twenty-eight others in a convent that had closed off to the public because of the plandemic?

No cause and effect?

Well, the Health Impact News website, which publishes a daily blog on the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus, has posted astory about the case of whistleblowers in the Federal Republic of Germany who are terming what they are witnessesing with their own eyes as nothing other than other than homicide, if not murder:

Since that interview was published, other whistleblowers in Germany who work in nursing homes have also stepped forward, some with video footage showing residents being held down and vaccinated against their wish.

This is from our Rumble channel, and it is also on our Bitchute channel.

Attorney Reiner Fuellmich, talking about the residents who were previously in good physical health and only suffered from “dementia,” stated:

One of them was a runner, in his late 70s, or WAS a runner, I should say, who was also an opera singer.

He outran one of the nurses who is in her mid 30s. He was still singing operas on the day that he got vaccinated.

After he got vaccinated, a couple of days later, he died.

So this opera singer, doesn’t sing anymore.

One of the most disturbing things about what these whistleblower videos reveal, according to Attorney Fuellmich, is that now they are getting more and more calls from other whistleblowers in nursing homes, in Germany and around the world, where they are reporting the same things.

We are getting more and more calls from other whistleblowers from other nursing homes in this country, plus we’re getting information from other countries, Sweden for example, Norway for example, Gibraltar for example, there are also incidents in England and in the United States that match these descriptions.

Attorney Fuellmich is not afraid to state exactly where this evidence leads us:

It means that people are dying because of the vaccines.

What we are seeing in this video clip is worse than anything we ever expected.

If this is representative for what’s going on in the other nursing homes, and in other countries, then we have a very serious problem.

And so do the people who make the vaccines, so do the people who administer the vaccines.

It looks more and more as though we’re dealing with homicide, and maybe even murder.

We are Witnessing a Eugenics Program that Includes Genocide

How fitting that the tide of whistleblowers coming forward now is gaining steam in Germany, whose population is probably all too familiar with their country’s own history of the eugenics program that was implemented in Germany during WWII.

The horrific medical experimentations and genocide that happened in Germany were condemned during the Nuremburg trials, and it is very clear that these experimental mRNA COVID injections, when given to people without informed consent and against their will, are clearly violating the principles of informed medical consent, and the condemnation of medical experimentation, that is spelled out in the Nuremburg Code.

To anyone participating in forced COVID vaccinations, either through supplying the injections or actually doing the injections, you are hereby put on notice that you are participating in homicide and mass murder, and justice will catch up to you at some point.

You will not escape, and you will not be able to claim ignorance as an excuse to participate in murder.

As for the American public: will you finally wake up and start protecting the innocent? Or will you stand by and be quiet, following the poor examples in Germany during WWII, where most of the public said and did nothing? (Whistleblower Video Footage of Forced Covid 19 Vacines in German Nursing Homes Goes Public; Attorney: We are dealing with homicide, maybe even murder.)

Why should anyone care about the Nuremburg trials when almost no one in the medical, legal, pharmaceutical, insurance, education, political and even theological spheres today cares about the binding precepts of the Ten Commandments and the Natural Law? 

Indeed, the eternal laws of God and even the natural laws that are knowable, albeit imperfectly, by human reason mean nothing to today's caste of monstrous ghouls, who are plying their deadly trade on a global scale with great efficiency even in once proudly Catholic Spain, which is suffering today under a Communist regime whose reliance upon the medical technocrats is such that a new breed of "outcasts" is being created for those who refuse to be vaccinated for the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus even after published news accounts of the numbers of those dying in the land of Saint Ferdinand III, Ferdinand and Isabella, Philip II, Philip IV, and countless numbers of saints, blesseds and venerables:

LOS BARRIOS, SPAIN — The Nuestra Señora del Rosario (Our Lady of the Rosary) nursing home is reeling due to mass deaths after mRNA inoculations.

All residents and workers at the facility received the first dose of Pfizer mRNA in early January, according to Spain mainstream media outlet ABC de Sevilla. Most residents became extremely ill shortly after the shots. It is believed many came down with COVID-19, despite being “vaccinated against it.”

The Andalusian Health Service reported that at least 46 residents have died since January. For perspective, Our Lady has a maximum capacity of 145 residents. The Junta de Andalucía (regional government) intervened in early February to curtail the death count. But people continued dying. Spain’s Ministry of Health is now in charge of mitigation. The Ministry said in a statement:

In view of the imminent risk to public health, and in particular for the [residents] and workers of this center, as the current protocol for disinfection and isolation of positive cases cannot be guaranteed.

The situation remains dire, as at least 28 residents and 12 staff members were COVID-19 positive last week. Health officials halted all further mRNA shots as a result. The Federation of Public Services criticized Our Lady for not taking action sooner. The workers’ union said the response was inadequate after eight people died by January 18. The death count grew to 30 by January 28.

Spain is continually in the news related to mRNA shots. Health Minister Salvador Illa said in December that his agency is keeping a database of all citizens who refuse the mRNA. He said the list will be shared with all EU members. A healthcare worker in Spain also recently reported that several mRNA recipients have been admitted to Hospitals in the Region of Murcia for encephalitis. (Second Pfizer Shots Halted After 46 Residents Die after the First Shot at Our Lady of the Rosary nursing home in Los Barrios, Spain.)

The scientific and technocratic elite are so heartless and so utterly merciless that it does not matter to them how many people die from their draconian vaccinations, including a young healthcare worker in Wisconsin who suffered an aneurysm after receiving the Pfizer BioNTech vaccination and was subsequently “brain death” so that her vital bodily organs could be vivisected from her body, which is why she is being kept alive until the job of vivisecting her is complete:

The young healthcare worker’s life was essentially extinguished the very next day.

Ms. Stickles received the second dose of the Pfizer mRNA shot on or around February 2, according to a family Facebook post. She immediately broke out in rashes. Ms. Stickles had severe headaches five days later, Sunday, February 7. Soon thereafter, she started crying and said “something isn’t right. Just hold me” She lost the ability to speak, her eyes crossed and glazed over, before she lost consciousness, according to a Facebook post by Jacqueline F. Gifford.

She was taken to SwedishAmerican Hospital, just over the state line from Beloit. The initial diagnosis was a ruptured brain aneurysm. She was then airlifted to the University of Wisconsin Hospital in Madison the next day, according to her uncle, George Allen Petit. Doctors performed a cerebral angiography through her groin all the way up to her brain. Subarachnoid hemorrhage was also mentioned as the possible issue.

Kara Stickles, Sara’s twin sister, posted an update on February 10. Sara “has no brain activity,” she said. Doctors called the family and summonsed them to the hospital to say their goodbyes. She died yesterday.

Sara’s legacy

Ms. Stickles, 28, leaves behind a young son. It appears she had just began a job at SwedishAmerican Hospital within the last several months. Ms. Stickles is an organ donor. So doctors are keeping her body alive until it is time to harvest said organs. She was a big fan of Eminen and the movie “Love and Basketball.” The family set up a GoFundMe page to help pay for the funeral expenses. (Twenty-eight year-old woman has brain aneurysm declared “brain dead” days after the Second Pfizer mRNA shot.)

Obviously, the author of this blog believes in the medical industry’s manufactured, profit-making myth of “brain death,” whose sole purpose is to harvest the vital bodily organs of living human beings and thus does not realize that Sara Stickles’ “death” by “brain death” was one of medical expediency. No effort was made to help her medically. Sara Stickles suffered an aneurysm caused by the Pfizer BioNTech vaccination, which also caused her skin to break out with terrible rashes.

Do not believe anything that the tyrannical deep state creatures of a scientific and technocratic monolith publish. The high priests and priestesses of Modernity, fearing not the just Judgment of Christ the King on their immortal souls when they died, believe that they can say or do anything they want with impunity as the masses must believe whatever they say is true and that those who expose their lives must be punished and denounced for bringing forth those inconvenient things called facts into public view.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s, Children’s Heath Defense organization has taken a deeper look at the statistics of the deaths that even public “health” officials  have admitted, no matter how reluctantly, have been caused by the “side effects” of the poisons that are said to be “vaccinations”:

According to new data released today, as of Feb. 12, 15,923 adverse reactions to COVID vaccines, including 929 deaths, have been reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) since Dec. 14, 2020.

VAERS is the primary mechanism in the U.S. for reporting adverse vaccine reactions. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a determination can be made as to whether the reported adverse event was directly or indirectly caused by the vaccine.

 

The latest VAERS data show that 799 of the deaths were reported in the U.S., and that about one-third of those deaths occurred within 48 hours of the individual receiving the vaccination.

As is consistent with previous VAERS data reports, 192 of the reported deaths — or 21% — were cardiac-related. As The Defender reported earlier this month, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, a pediatric rheumatologist, warned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in December that mRNA vaccines like those developed by Pfizer and Moderna could cause heart attacks and other injuries in ways not assessed in safety trials.

Of the 929 deaths reported since Dec. 14, 2020, the average age of the deceased was 77.8 and the youngest was 23. Fifty-two percent of the reported deaths were among men, 45% were women and 3% are unknown. Fifty-eight percent of the deaths were reported in people who received the Pfizer vaccine, and 41% were related to the Moderna vaccine.

States with the highest reported number of deaths were: California (71); Florida (50); Ohio (38); New York (31); Kentucky (41); Michigan (31); and Texas (31).

CBS Detroit reported this week that a 68-year old news anchor died one day after being vaccinated for COVID of a suspected stroke.

Reports of deaths among elderly people after being vaccinated for COVID continue to surface, including the article published this week by The Defender about 46 nursing home residents in Spain who died within one month of receiving the Pfizer vaccine.

According to the latest data, 3,126 “serious” adverse reactions have been reported. Adverse reaction reports from the latest CDC data also include:

So far, only Pfizer and Moderna vaccines — approved for emergency use, but not fully licensed — are being used in the U.S.

AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine, which does not use mRNA technology, was approved for emergency use this week by the World Health Organization, paving the way for some countries to start using it. However, as The Defender reported this week, some nations have said they won’t use it, citing safety and efficacy concerns.

FiercePharma reported today that the FDA may reject the AstraZeneca vaccine over concerns relating to efficacy, especially against new COVID variants, and manufacturing issues.

News reports indicate that a growing number of people, including nearly 30% of healthcare workers, now say they don’t want the COVID vaccine, citing safety concerns.

The Washington Post reported this week that nearly a third of military personnel are opting out of the vaccines, and ESPN reported that top NBA players are reluctant to promote the vaccine.

Meanwhile, the FDA has not yet implemented systems to monitor the safety of the experimental COVID vaccines. FDA officials told The New York Times they don’t expect the systems to be up and running before the Biden administration reaches its goal of vaccinating 100 million Americans — nearly one third of the U.S. population.

As of Feb. 19, about 56.3 million people in the U.S. had received one or both doses of a COVID vaccine.

While the VAERS database numbers may seem sobering, according to a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study, the actual number of adverse events is likely significantly higher. VAERS is a passive surveillance system that relies on the willingness of individuals to submit reports voluntarily.

According to the VAERS website, healthcare providers are required by law to report to VAERS:

Any adverse event listed in the VAERS Table of Reportable Events Following Vaccination that occurs within the specified time period after vaccination

An adverse event listed by the vaccine manufacturer as a contraindication to further doses of the vaccine

The CDC says healthcare providers are strongly encouraged to report:

Any adverse event that occurs after the administration of a vaccine licensed in the United States, whether or not it is clear that a vaccine caused the adverse event

Vaccine administration errors

However, “within the specified time” means that reactions occurring outside that timeframe may not be reported, in addition to reactions suffered hours or days later by people who don’t report those reactions to their healthcare provider.

Vaccine manufacturers are required to report to VAERS “all adverse events that come to their attention.”

Historically, however, fewer than fewer than 1% of adverse events have ever been reported to VAERS, a system that Children’s Health Defense has previously referred to as an “abject failure,” including in a December 2020 letter to Dr. David  Kessler, former FDA director and now co-chair of the COVID-19 Advisory Board and President Biden’s version of Operation Warp Speed.

A critic familiar with VAERS’ shortcomings bluntly condemned VAERS in The BMJ as “nothing more than window dressing, and a part of U.S. authorities’ systematic effort to reassure/deceive us about vaccine safety.”

CHD is calling for complete transparency. The children’s health organization is asking Kessler and the federal government to release all of the data from the clinical trials and suspend COVID-19 vaccine use in any group not adequately represented in the clinical trials, including the elderly, frail and anyone with comorbidities.

CHD is also asking for full transparency in post-marketing data that reports all health outcomes, including new diagnoses of autoimmune disorders, adverse events and deaths from COVID vaccines.

Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps. (Latest Numbers from the Centers  for Disease Control Vaccine Adverse Reactions website.)

“Transparency?”

Such is not in the vocabulary or the agenda of Big Pharma, whose companies are fully indemnified for the adverse reactions, including death, caused by their poisons sold to the public as “vaccines,” and any public “health” agency, including the United States Centers for Disease Control, the World Health Organization and the United States National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Too much money is to be made and then to change hands. Too much control of the public is at stake.

The situation is even worse than that reported by the Children’s Health Defense organization as the Centers for Disease Control, which has consistently inflated the numbers of the actual cases of the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus and is now underreporting the numbers of deaths and injuries caused by the Pfizer BioNTech and Modern vaccinations:

Yesterday we reported that the CDC had done another data dump into the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database, showing that through February 4, 2021, there were 12,697 recorded adverse events, including 653 deaths following injections of the experimental COVID mRNA shots by Pfizer and Moderna.

After publishing this article, a Health Impact News subscriber sent me a link to a page on the CDC website where they are reporting that as of February 11, 2021, VAERS received 1,170 reports of death among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.

The page, at least at the time of publication today, is located here: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html.

We have captured a screen shot of this page, and made some editorial edits.

Click on image for full size. Edited by Health Impact News with editorial edits, protected by free speech and freedom of the press in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Original page here.

For the past few weeks, the CDC has been slowly updating the VAERS database with data dumps on Friday, just before the weekend and the beginning of the slow news cycle that usually picks up again on Mondays.

On Friday, January 29th, their VAERS data reported 329 deaths from people receiving one of the experimental COVID mRNA injections.

The following Friday, February 5, 2021, their VAERS data reported 501 deaths. An increase of 172 deaths.

Yesterday, February 12, 2021, the CDC VAERS data reported 653 deaths. An increase of 152 deaths.

That still leaves 517 deaths unaccounted for in the VAERS database related to the COVID injections.

Why is the CDC withholding this information?   (Centers for Disease Control Withholding Information on the true number of deaths caused by the vaccinations.)

“Transparency?”

What about the cases of sterility in women of child-bearing years after receiving the poisonous concoction called a "vaccine" against the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus? 

All manner of "fact-checking" (translation: censorious propagandists whose job it is to deny the truth, falsify information and make it appear that falsehood is true and to gaslight unsuspecting souls into believing what is unfactual is indeed factual) organizations and websites keep denying that the vaccines against the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus are causing sterility. Yet it is that we have received second-hand reports from those who know young women who have been sterilized. The same people who keep denying the link between the multiple vaccination routine to which most children submitted are now denying that their vaccines are causing the deaths of those who die within days or weeks of receiving the Pfizer BioNTech vaccination or are causing sterility in women of childbearing years. 

Do not expect “transparency” from those who are committed to the killing off the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means and to the killing of anyone else after birth, including newborns, according to a variety of ever-mutating utilitarian reasons.

What we can expect from the plandemicists are meaningless assurances about vaccine “safety” and effectiveness” while they boil the public alive like frogs with never-ending “new” requirements to get more and more vaccinations and to even restrict entry into businesses open to the public only to those who can show proof of having been vaccinated against the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus.

Ah, you doubt my word.

As the late Charles Dillon “Casey” Stengel would have said, “You can look it up.”

None other than the ever-nefarious William Gates, one of the plandemic’s chief architects, is now pushing the idea of three vaccines:

A third dose of coronavirus vaccine may be needed to prevent serious cases of new variants of the disease, Bill Gates said Tuesday. The billionaire philanthropist's comments come amid to the growing concern that current vaccines are less effective against the South African and Brazilian variants.

"The discussion now is do we just need to get a super high coverage of the current vaccine, or do we need a third dose that's just the same, or do we need a modified vaccine?" Gates told "CBS Evening News" anchor and managing editor Norah O'Donnell.

"All five of the companies that have U.S. vaccines are looking at making that modification and adding that in so that people who've already had two shots might need to get a third shot," he said. "I think it's reasonably likely that we will have a tuned vaccine just to make absolutely sure that as these variants hit the U.S. that they're not escaping from vaccine protection." 

Gates is funding studies in South Africa to determine whether the AstraZenecaJohnson & Johnson and Novavax vaccines were as effective against the more contagious variant.

"AstraZeneca in particular has a challenge with the variant. And the other two, Johnson & Johnson and Novavax, are slightly less effective, but still effective enough that we absolutely should get them out as fast as we can while we study this idea of tuning the vaccine," Gates said. 

If the coronavirus is not eradicated, he said, additional shots may be necessary in the future. "Probably not yearly, but as long as it's out there, we want as many Americans as possible not to be spreading it to each other," he said. 

Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the former head of the Food and Drug Administration, told CBS News' "Face the Nation" on February 7 that he believed the vaccines currently being distributed in the U.S. would offer "reasonable protection" against the new variants, even if they are less effective against the new strains. Still, he said, it may also be necessary to administer booster shots in the fall. (Gates Says That a Third Vaccination may be necessary to protect against Covid variants.)

Why stop at three?

Why not four, five, six, eighty-five vaccinations?

Remember, William Gates has a huge financial stake in the development of the poisons masquerading as “vaccines,” and it is to his own considerable financial advantage to push more and more vaccinations in the name of “protecting” the public.

Meanwhile plandemicists in the United Kingdom are busily developing an “application” to restrict entry to grocery stores to “vaccinated” people, something that I have noted in earlier parts of this series would one day become a reality here in the United States of America:

Britain is considering implementation of a vaccine certificate that could be used to allow or deny entry of an individual to things like a grocery store, U.K. outlets reported.

The idea, which was first suggested by vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi in November before being roundly denied, has gained a second life with Foreign Minister Dominic Raab telling British radio station LBC it was still a possibility.

"Well, it's something that hasn't been ruled out," Raab said. "It's under consideration, but of course you've got to make it workable. I think the thing with when I've looked at this, whether it's at the international, domestic, or local level, you've got to know that the document that is being presented is something you can rely on – that it is an accurate status of the individual.

"So, I'm not sure there's a foolproof answer in the way that sometimes it's presented, but we'll look at all the options."

Raab added, it was the up to the government if or how the proposal would be legal.

"In terms of the law that would apply, that's something that's the prerogative of the government and parliament," he continued. "But what we want to do is make sure there's enough confidence in the national rollout, that when we're in a position to open non-essential retail and, in due course after that, hospitality, people can do so confidently.

"The legalities and the mechanisms, that all needs to be worked out. And the prime minister, I said, will give a clearer sense of the direction of travel on Feb. 22."

However, not all members of the ruling Conservative Party are on board with the idea.

Parliament member Mark Harper said Britain should never "get to a position where we are telling people they can't do things unless they have been vaccinated with COVID," told LBC.

"For everyday life, I don't think you want to require people to have to have a particular medical procedure before they can go about their day-to-day life," he said. "That is not how we do things in Britain." (Britain is Developing a Vaccination Certification to Permit Access to Grocery Stores.)

Don’t bet against such a “certificate” from being used in some states here in the United States of America sooner rather than later. The plandemicists have no regard for the laws of God and the just laws of men, and they regard individual human beings as dispensable “cogs” in the collectivity just as surely as Karl Marx regarded the masses as merely cogs in the establishment and maintenance of the “New Socialist Man.”

Another stronghold of the plandemic is the leaders of the United States military, which has become a deep preserve of the deep state and is an active “partner” in the ongoing plandemic and thus of the Great Reset, are trying to figure out how to convince the over one-third of uniformed forces who have thus far have refused or have indicated that they will refuse to receive vaccinations for the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus:

By the thousands, U.S. service members are refusing or putting off the COVID-19 vaccine as frustrated commanders scramble to knock down internet rumors and find the right pitch that will persuade troops to get the shot.

Some Army units are seeing as few as one-third agree to the vaccine. Military leaders searching for answers believe they have identified one potential convincer: an imminent deployment. Navy sailors on ships heading out to sea last week, for example, were choosing to take the shot at rates exceeding 80% to 90%.

Air Force Maj. Gen. Jeff Taliaferro, vice director of operations for the Joint Staff, told Congress on Wednesday that “very early data” suggests that just up to two-thirds of the service members offered the vaccine have accepted.

That's higher than the rate for the general population, which a recent survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation put at roughly 50%. But the significant number of forces declining the vaccine is especially worrisome because troops often live, work and fight closely together in environments where social distancing and wearing masks, at times, are difficult.

The military’s resistance also comes as troops are deploying to administer shots at vaccination centers around the country and as leaders look to American forces to set an example for the nation.

“We're still struggling with what is the messaging and how do we influence people to opt in for the vaccine,” said Brig. Gen. Edward Bailey, the surgeon for Army Forces Command. He said that in some units just 30% have agreed to take the vaccine, while others are between 50% and 70%. Forces Command oversees major Army units, encompassing about 750,000 Army, Reserve and National Guard soldiers at 15 bases.

At Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where several thousand troops are preparing for future deployments, the vaccine acceptance rate is about 60%, Bailey said. That's "not as high as we would hope for front-line personnel,” he said.

Bailey has heard all the excuses.

“I think the most amusing one I heard was, ‘The Army always tells me what to do, they gave me a choice, so I said no’,” he said.

Service leaders have vigorously campaigned for the vaccine. They have held town halls, written messages to the force, distributed scientific data, posted videos, and even put out photos of leaders getting vaccinated.

For weeks, the Pentagon insisted it did not know how many troops were declining the vaccine. On Wednesday they provided few details on their early data.

Officials from individual military services, however, said in interviews with The Associated Press that refusal rates vary widely, depending on a service member's age, unit, location, deployment status and other intangibles.

The variations make it harder for leaders to identify which arguments for the vaccine are most persuasive. The Food and Drug Administration has allowed emergency use of the vaccine, so it's voluntary. But Defense Department officials say they hope that soon may change.

“We cannot make it mandatory yet,” Vice Adm. Andrew Lewis, commander of the Navy’s 2nd Fleet, said last week. “I can tell you we’re probably going to make it mandatory as soon as we can, just like we do with the flu vaccine."

About 40 Marines gathered recently in a California conference room for an information session from medical staff. One officer, who was not authorized to publicly discuss private conversations and spoke on condition of anonymity, said Marines are more comfortable posing questions about the vaccine in smaller groups.

The officer said one Marine, citing a widely circulated and false conspiracy theory, said: “I heard that this thing is actually a tracking device.” The medical staff, said the officer, quickly debunked that theory, and pointed to the Marine’s cellphone, noting that it’s an effective tracker.

Other frequent questions revolved around possible side effects or health concerns, including for pregnant women. Army, Navy and Air Force officials say they hear much the same.

The Marine Corps is a relatively small service and troops are generally younger. Similar to the general population, younger service members are more likely to decline or ask to wait. In many cases, military commanders said, younger troops say they have had the coronavirus or known others who had it, and concluded it was not bad.

“What they’re not seeing is that 20-year-olds who’ve actually gotten very sick, have been hospitalized or die, or the folks who appear to be fine but then it turns out they’ve developed pulmonary and cardiac abnormalities,” Bailey said.

One ray of hope has been deployments.

Lewis, based in Norfolk, Virginia, said last week that sailors on the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, which is operating in the Atlantic, agreed to get the shot at a rate of about 80%. Sailors on the USS Iwo Jima and Marines in the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, who also are deploying, had rates of more than 90%.

Bailey said the Army is seeing opportunities to reduce the two-week quarantine period for units deploying to Europe if service members are largely vaccinated and the host nation agrees. U.S. Army Europe may cut the quarantine time to five days if 70% of the unit is vaccinated, and that incentive could work, he said.

The acceptance numbers drop off among those who are not deploying, military officials said.

Gen. James McConville, the Army's chief of staff, used his own experience to encourage troops to be vaccinated. “When they asked me how it felt, I said it was a lot less painful than some of the meetings I go to in the Pentagon.”

Col. Jody Dugai, commander of the Bayne-Jones Army Community Hospital at Fort Polk, Louisiana, said that so far conversations at the squad level, with eight to 10 peers, have been successful, and that getting more information helps.

At the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, Brig. Gen. David Doyle, has a dual challenge. As base commander, he must persuade the nearly 7,500 soldiers on base to get the shot and he needs to ensure that the thousands of troops that cycle in and out for training exercises are safe.

Doyle said the acceptance rate on his base is between 30% and 40%, and that most often ut’s the younger troops who decline.

“They tell me they don’t have high confidence in the vaccine because they believe it was done too quickly,” he said. Top health officials have attested to the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine.

Doyle said it appears peers are often more influential than leaders in persuading troops — a sentiment echoed by Bailey, the Army Forces Command surgeon.

“We're trying to figure out who the influencers are,” Bailey said. “Is it a squad leader or platoon sergeant in the Army? I think it probably is. Someone who is more of their age and interacts with them more on a regular basis versus the general officer who takes his picture and says, ‘I got the shot.’'' (Thousands of Miltary Personnel refuse to get the  Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronvirus Vaccination.)

The people who are charged with leading the United States Department of Defense and those who serve as uniformed commanders therein have to figure out how to overcome “misinformation” with the disinformation that passes for the plandemicists’ version of “truth,” and this is say nothing of how the military, which has become a bastion of Christophobia and Islamophilia and of the entirety of the agenda set by the organized crime family of the naturalist “left,” which includes the eternal global warfare Trotskyites in the morally decadent Never Trump network, is now enforcing the so-called “woke” agenda that exists those God created with specific biological features (meaning that they have white skin) without regard to the fact that the immortal soul He has endowed us with has no color whatsoever (see Woke Military Endangers the United States). Compliance with the plandemicists’ plans and mandates is not optional and handled with consummate severity, up to and including being considered an “extremist” and/or “mentally ill” for refusing to take the poisonous, genetically-modifying concoctions that are killing some people and injuring many others.

Not to be outdone, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has authorized his minions to warn employees of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River that they could lose their jobs if they do not get vaccinated to “protect” themselves and ostensibly others against the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus:

Rome — The Vatican has taken a hard line against employees who refuse to be vaccinated for COVID-19, warning they risk losing their jobs. 

According to a decree by Cardinal Giuseppe Bertello, whose role as President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State makes him the territory's top administrator, employees who refuse the vaccine "without proven health reasons" face penalties that can include "the interruption of the work relationship." 

Vatican City is the world's smallest independent state, sitting right in the heart of Rome. It employs several thousand people, most of whom actually live outside the walled 100-acre territory and inside Italy proper. 

Those who do reside inside the Vatican's walls tend to be elderly, such as retired Pope Benedict XVI, 93, and Pope Francis, 84. The pontiff was vaccinated for COVID-19 last month and has been a big supporter of inoculation in the global fight against the coronavirus. 

"It is an ethical choice because you are gambling with your health, with your life, but you are also gambling with the lives of others," Francis told an Italian TV station last month.

Bertello, who runs day-to-day life in Vatican City, tested positive for the coronavirus in December. Fewer than 30 people at the Vatican have contracted the disease.

Last month the Vatican began vaccinating homeless people who are looked after in the territory's food and health facilities. 

Under Francis the Vatican has set up a number of facilities to help Rome's homeless population, offering areas for people to bathe and get haircuts, as well as food and health care. This winter it began offering free COVID tests to migrants and the homeless, directly beneath the window where the pope delivers.

Italy, once the epicenter of the global pandemic, is now battling a second wave worse than its first, as well as new variants of the virus such as the one first discovered in the United Kingdom, which now accounts for one in five new cases. 

More than 94,000 deaths have been blamed on the virus in Italy, the second highest death toll in Europe behind the United Kingdom. (Vatican May Make Vaccine Mandatory for Employment.)

Obviously, it would be a blessing for those working inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River to be fired and thus bear no further culpability for the dogmatic, canonical, theological, ecclesiological, liturgical, moral, Scriptural and pastoral errors being disseminated therefrom on a daily basis to the detriment of souls and thus to the entirety of a truly just social order, which is premised upon right ordering within the souls of men.

As noted before, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is fully supportive of the "global reset of humanity," and, despite the fact that vaccines used to protect against the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus that containing RNA genetic modifiers that are meant to create "transhumans" (genetically modified organisms, if you will), the Argentine Apostate is requring that all journalists accompanying him on his anti-apostolic pilgrimage to Iraq in ten days show proof of being vaccinated in order to be allowed onboard the anipapal aircraft:

3.2 Due to the current pandemic situation, it will be necessary to wear personal protective equipment (surgical or FFP2/FFP3 type face mask) in every occasion in which there may be contact with at least one other person and a safe distance of at least one metre is not guaranteed.

3.3 Since some unforeseen situations beyond the control of the trip organization may make it difficult to respect the necessary measures of personal protection from COVID-19, especially with regard to social distancing, in order to participate in the Apostolic Journey of the Holy Father Francis in Iraq it is necessary to have undergone the vaccination against COVID- 19 within the appropriate time.

3.4 If the vaccination has already been provided for in time in their country of residence, journalists admitted to the Papal Flight must send a copy of the relevant vaccination certificate, certifying its effectiveness as of 1 March 2021, to accreditamenti@salastampa.va.

3.5 If the vaccination is not provided for, or has not be administered in time, in their country of residence, journalists admitted to the Papal Flight must include a request to receive the vaccination in their letter of application to the Papal Flight.

3.6 For journalists admitted to the Papal Flight who request it, the vaccine will be administered according to a vaccination schedule which will be communicated at a later date. For organizational purposes only, the first vaccination will be administered in early February and the booster in the last week of the same month.

3.7 With regard to health prescriptions upon return to Italy or your country of residence (quarantine periods, communications to the relevant health authorities, etc.), please refer to the regulations in force at the time of return.

3.8 At present, despite vaccination, health regulations make it compulsory to undergo a PCR test before every international departure. In the unlikely event that the journalists admitted to the Papal Flight, although vaccinated, receive a positive result in the prescribed PCR tests before departure from Rome, they will not be able to participate in the trip and will have to bear the costs of the penalties for the hotel in Iraq and the air ticket. In the event of a positive result to the prescribed PCR tests prior to departure from Iraq, the journalists will not be admitted to the return flight and will have to face the periods of sanitary surveillance in the country, in accordance with the provisions made by the competent authorities, covering costs necessary for the stay and the sanitary expenses. (Argentine Apostate Requires Reporters on His Trip to Iraq to Receive the Covid Vaccine.)

Nonetheless, however, what the news report cited just above demonstrates is that, as noted in previous parts of this series, Antipope Francis is a reliable “partner” of the “Great Reset,” of which the plandemic is an indispensable first step. There has never been anything that the statists have proposed to “improve humanity” that has not received Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s complete antipapal imprimatur and even his apologia in various gabfests called “homilies,” audiences, interviews, and other speeches.

A fake pope goes along with the fake narrative of a Red Chinese "pandemic" tha is part of its genetic warfare and then mandates vaccinations containing fetal cell lines and that permanently modify one's genetic code. This all he work of Antichrist.

Although we know that the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph in the end, the demons are on the loose today, which is why we must cling to Our Lady as never before to protect us from succumbing to the propaganda that bombards those who still watch television or who simply listen to their neighbors and who think that their primary care physician is truly committed to providing health care that is in accord with authentic medical and scientific facts and not in accord to the “talking points” that have been distributed to them by Big Pharma.

Andrew Mark Cuomo and Other Statist Thugs

One of the worst of the statist monsters, of course, is Governor Death himself, the arrogant Andrew Mark Cuomo, a man who should be impeached but who will probably escape anything other than a bit of bruising to his thin skin and a slight concussion to his ego-on-steroids. The nefarious Figlio di Sfachim presided over a massacre of the elderly confined to nursing homes in the State of New York and is now distinguishing himself for being stereotypically arrogant in the face of revelations that he ordered a cover-up of the number of people killed by his gubernatorial malfeasance and hubris.

As discussed in “Sin: More Deadly Than the Coronavirus, part ten,” on February 8, 2021, New York Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo deliberately put patients infected with the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus into nursing homes without telling other patients or their families. Moreover, Cuomo and his state health director, Dr. Howard Zucker, lied about the true number of deaths caused by their utilitarian malfeasance and then covered up the statistics when the United States Department of Justice requested them. One of the Figlio di Sfachim’s aides, Melissa DeRosa, Secretary to the Governor (the State of New York equivalent to a White House Chief of Staff), conceded that Cuomo did this to avoid criticism from then President Donald John Trump, whom he had denounced for “incompetence” in the managing of the plandemic that made it possible for the use of mail-in ballots and the fraud that resulted therefrom.

Here is a news report on Cuomo’s criminal malfeasance that should be used as the grounds for his impeachment by the New York State Assembly and conviction by the New York State Senate but as noted above, will probably result in little more than his declining to seek a fourth term in office next year:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s top aide privately apologized to Democratic lawmakers for withholding the state’s nursing home death toll from COVID-19 — telling them “we froze” out of fear that the true numbers would “be used against us” by federal prosecutors, The Post has learned.

The stunning admission of a coverup was made by secretary to the governor Melissa DeRosa during a video conference call with state Democratic leaders in which she said the Cuomo administration had rebuffed a legislative request for the tally in August because “right around the same time, [then-President Donald Trump] turns this into a giant political football,” according to an audio recording of the two-hour-plus meeting.

“He starts tweeting that we killed everyone in nursing homes,” DeRosa said. “He starts going after [New Jersey Gov. Phil] Murphy, starts going after [California Gov. Gavin] Newsom, starts going after [Michigan Gov.] Gretchen Whitmer.”

In addition to attacking Cuomo’s fellow Democratic governors, DeRosa said, Trump “directs the Department of Justice to do an investigation into us.”

“And basically, we froze,” she told the lawmakers on the call.

“Because then we were in a position where we weren’t sure if what we were going to give to the Department of Justice, or what we give to you guys, what we start saying, was going to be used against us while we weren’t sure if there was going to be an investigation.”

DeRosa added: “That played a very large role into this.”

After dropping the bombshell, DeRosa asked for “a little bit of appreciation of the context” and offered what appears to be the Cuomo administration’s first apology for its handling of nursing homes amid the pandemic.

But instead of a mea culpa to the grieving family members of more than 13,000 dead seniors or the critics who say the Health Department spread COVID-19 in the care facilities with a March 25 state Health Department directive that nursing homes admit infected patients, DeRosa tried to make amends with the fellow Democrats for the political inconvenience it caused them.

“So we do apologize,” she said. “I do understand the position that you were put in. I know that it is not fair. It was not our intention to put you in that political position with the Republicans.”

Assembly Health Committee Chairman Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan) immediately rejected DeRosa’s expression of remorse, according to the recording.

“I don’t have enough time today to explain all the reasons why I don’t give that any credit at all,” said Gottfried, one of the lawmakers who demanded the death-toll data in August.

State Senate Aging Committee Chairwoman Rachel May (D-Syracuse) — who was battered during her re-election bid last year over the issue of nursing home deaths — also ripped into DeRosa, saying her former opponent had launched another broadside earlier in the day.

“And the issue for me, the biggest issue of all is feeling like I needed to defend — or at least not attack — an administration that was appearing to be covering something up,” she said.

“And in a, in a pandemic, when you want the public to trust the public health officials, and there is this clear feeling that they’re not coming, being forthcoming with you, that is really hard and it remains difficult.”

Assemblyman Ron Kim (D-Queens), who took part in the call, told The Post on Thursday that DeRosa’s remarks sounded “like they admitted that they were trying to dodge having any incriminating evidence that might put the administration or the [Health Department] in further trouble with the Department of Justice.”

“That’s how I understand their reasoning of why they were unable to share, in real time, the data,” Kim said.

“They had to first make sure that the state was protected against federal investigation.”

Kim, whose uncle is presumed to have died of COVID-19 in a nursing home in April, also said he wasn’t satisfied with DeRosa’s apology.

“It’s not enough how contrite they are with us,” he said. “They need to show that to the public and the families — and they haven’t done that.”

In addition to stonewalling lawmakers on the total number of nursing home residents killed by COVID-19, Cuomo’s administration refused requests from the news media — including The Post — and fought a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by the Empire Center on Public Policy.

Instead, it only disclosed data on the numbers of residents who died in their nursing homes.

But after state Attorney General Letitia James last month released a damning report that estimated the deaths of nursing home residents in hospitals would boost the grim tally by more than 50 percent, Health Commissioner Howard Zucker finally released figures showing the combined total was 12,743 as of Jan. 19.

Just a day earlier, the DOH was only publicly acknowledging 8,711 deaths in nursing homes.

In a Wednesday letter to lawmakers, Zucker said the total number of nursing home residents killed by COVID-19 had increased to 13,297. That number jumps to 15,049 when assisted living/adult care facilities are factored in.

The controversy generated by James’ report led to an infamous news conference at which Cuomo callously dismissed the matter of where nursing home fatalities actually took place.

“Who cares [if they] died in the hospital, died in a nursing home? They died,” he said.

During Wednesday’s conference call, DeRosa said it appeared the DOJ was no longer focused on New York’s nursing home deaths.

“All signs point to they are not looking at this, they’ve dropped it,” she said.

“They never formally opened an investigation. They sent a letter asking a number of questions and then we satisfied those questions and it appears that they’re gone.”

In a prepared statement, Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi said, “We explained that the Trump administration was in the midst of a politically motivated effort to blame democratic states for COVID deaths and that we were cooperating with Federal document productions and that was the priority and now that it is over we can address the state legislature.”

“That said, we were working simultaneously to complete the audit of information they were asking for,” he added.

The DOJ declined to comment. (A Cuomo Aide Admits They Hid Nursing Home Data From Federal Investigators.)

A bad policy resulted in the needless deaths of innocent human beings by an amoral pro-abortion, pro-perversity uber-egomaniac, Andrew Mark Cuomo, who then, with the help of his friends in the mainslime media who fawned over his “leadership” abilities when he was only leading in malfeasance and press conferences where he postured, preened, cried and blamed then President Donald John Trump at every turn, covered-up the evidence until he felt that it was politically “safe” to reveal the truth. Obviously, this begs the question as to why Cuomo and Zucker decided to overrule the advice of their “health professionals” to expose the elderly and the chronically ill in nursing homes to patients infected with the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus as the elderly and chronically ill are most at risk of developing complications and dying from the virus.

This question is even more important than the cover-up as Andrew Mark Cuomo is very adept at covering up his administration’s mistakes, including scandals.

One person whose father was a victim of Andrew Mark Cuomo’s and Howard Zucker’s malfeasance was a woman named Janice Dean Newman, who is, according to news reports, a meteorologist for Fox News. Mrs. Newman wrote about her father’s demise at the hands of Cuomo and Zucker as follows:

Thursday, Feb. 11 would have been my husband’s parents’ 60th wedding anniversary

Sadly, they aren’t with us this year to celebrate what should have been a tremendous milestone in their lives.

We lost them both to COVID last spring as the virus ravaged their long term care facilities. Their death warrant was signed as an executive order by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to put infected patients into the places where our most vulnerable resided.

Both born and bred in Brooklyn New York, Michael and Dolores "Dee" Newman were married right before Valentine’s Day on this day back in 1961. 

They met through Mickey’s sister Helen and fell in love writing to each other while he was serving in the Air Force, stationed at Hickam Air Force base in Hawaii.

As the story goes, Mickey proposed to Dee in one of those letters, and she wrote back "YES!" 

My husband Sean found stacks of their love notes while he was clearing out their four-story walk-up apartment in Brooklyn after they passed away. This was the home he grew up in with his sister Donna and brother Michael.

He was a proud member of the FDNY with memorabilia displayed all over the apartment they lived in for over 50 years.

Sean says he felt a calling to become a firefighter like his dad.  The smell of smoke in his father’s hair is something he remembers vividly. 

Even with their failing health, they both made it to see Sean get promoted to Battalion Chief in January 2019.

Sean’s mom Dee was a homemaker and had a part-time job working with a dentist in the neighborhood for close to 20 years. 

She was a devoted grandmother who made sure there was always a card and a gift for birthdays, anniversaries or special holidays. 

We lost my husband’s father Mickey first. He was in a nursing home where he was being cared for temporarily for ongoing health issues and dementia.   

Before he got sick in late March, we got a call saying he was being moved to another floor to allow for more residents to be placed in the nursing home.  

From what I know now, I believe those being let in were patients infected with COVID-19.  Gov. Cuomo signed an executive order on March 25, 2020, that allowed hospitals to transfer over 6,000 COVID positive seniors into their long-term care facilities. 

At the time, my mother in law Dee was living in an assisted living facility waiting for Mickey to get better and join her.  We found a nice place that was just minutes away from where we lived so that our family could visit and they would both be cared for.  

The hardest thing my husband has ever had to do was tell his mom her husband was dead. The news was delivered over the phone since we were not able to see her because of the quarantine restrictions in place. 

Heartbroken doesn’t begin to describe her despair.

I told her to hang on, and we would take care of her after the restrictions of the pandemic were lifted. 

Two weeks later Dee was diagnosed with COVID and died in the hospital. 

I remember that it was right before Easter because she asked Sean if he could buy gifts for the kids and to let them know it was from her.

I am still haunted by the reality that we were never able to see my husband’s parents before they died, to comfort them, hug them or hold their hands. 

After Dee died, Sean got a call from the hospital to say he was finally allowed to see his mom. But only to view her dead body through a glass window.

Now, I think of all the families almost a year later who cannot see their loved ones in long-term care facilities. 

Our seniors are still dying at alarming rates in nursing homes across New York State. Many of them I believe are getting sick from loneliness, neglect and broken hearts.

Meanwhile, Gov. Cuomo continues his blame game and the cover up of the total number of seniors who died from COVID-19 in nursing homes.

The fight for accountability from this governor, his health department and his administration has not been easy, but a few weeks ago we had some help from New York Attorney General Letitia James when she conducted her own investigation into the state’s  nursing home tragedy and concluded that it "severely" undercounted virus deaths in these facilities and asserted that it was likely the Cuomo administration failed to report them.

As of this writing, the latest information we have shows that at least 15,049 seniors have died after contracting COVID in their nursing homes. That’s an increase of more than 63 percent from what our governor and his health department were officially reporting.

When asked about the attorney general’s report last week, Gov. Cuomo responded by saying:

"Who cares if they died in the nursing home or in the hospital?  They died."

My response is:

WE care, governor.  Thousands of New Yorkers who lost their loved ones care.

And although there are now lawmakers now on both sides of the aisle who want a top-to-bottom investigation of the nursing home massacre in New York, there are those who are still stonewalling. 

On Tuesday, Democratic State Senator Rachel May, the Senate Aging Committee chairwoman rejected a motion that would have launched a bipartisan investigation into nursing home deaths.

Her cruel response?

"I don’t see the point."

Here’s what I would like to tell Sen. May: The point, Senator, is to find out why infected patients were put into our family member’s facilities and uncover all the numbers so that this never happens again.

And while I am grateful for the A.G.’s help in looking into this issue, we still need to find out why the governor decided to put COVID patients into their facilities in the first place. There needs to be a full independent bipartisan investigation into the nursing home massacre so that my husband’s parents and thousands of other families can have some peace.

My in-laws Mickey and Dee Newman deserve that.

They risked their lives unknowingly so that others hopefully will be safer in the future.  Our governor and those that helped spread the COVID wildfire through their facilities need to be held accountable for lighting the match. (Janice Dean Newman on the Cuomo Massacre of Nursing Home Patients, Including Her Husband’s Parents.)

The members of the organized crime family of the naturalist “left” believe that investigations are “necessary” when it comes to the policies of anyone who adheres to the naturalist falsehoods of the false opposite of the naturalist “right.” However, leftists consider themselves immune to criticism and investigation as only a “hater” would seek to call their “infallible” pronouncements into question or, worse yet, to investigate that which they see “no point” in examining as it would burst the protective bubble in which they live and consider themselves superior to the peons.

The deaths of the over twelve thousand people, including Sam and Dee Newman, at the hands of Andrew Mark Cuomo and Howard Zucker, were tragic and preventable. Many of the relatives of those who died because of Cuomo and Zucker’s epic management are now justifiably angry about the death-dealing duo’s arrogance in heretofore resisting all efforts to reveal the extent of their mismanagement and the repeated lies they told to dismiss all questions about their words and action, and so are some state legislators. However, it makes perfect sense for men who are callous in their support for and funding of the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means to be as callous about the deaths of innocent human beings that occurred because of their own social engineering. Those who do not see the Divine impress in the innocent preborn are not going to see it in anyone else thereafter as their principal considerations are always calculatedly utilitarian.

Andrew Mark Cuomo remains predictably defiant and brutally thuggish in the face of the belated but very well justified criticism that he is receiving for his supposed “leadership” that resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent human beings who had separated from their children and grandchildren because of the statist restrictions that have been issued by mere executive fiat to fight a man-made virus that, though dangerous for those who co-morbidities and for the elderly, kills less than one percent of those who are said to be infected with it:

A defensive Gov. Andrew Cuomo went on a 15-minute rant Friday in which he vowed to counter what he claimed were “lies” and “misinformation” about his handling of nursing homes amid the COVID-19 pandemic — while again offering no apologies for the death toll in the facilities.

“I’m not going to let you hurt New Yorkers by lying about what happened. Surrounding the death of a loved one,” Cuomo said during a virtual news conference in Albany.

“So, I’m going to take on the lies and the unscrupulous actors, especially when they cause pain and damage to New York.”

Cuomo again denied that a March 25 directive for nursing homes to accept coronavirus patients had caused additional deaths — or that he covered up the true toll, despite a top aide’s recorded admission that was revealed exclusively by The Post.

The embattled governor also declined to take any questions from The Post for the third time in a row since the story broke last week.

And while offering no apologies to the grieving families who blame the since-rescinded nursing home mandate for causing their kin’s deaths, Cuomo heaped praise on his health commissioner and “all the health staff,” saying, “Thank you for a great job.”

“I’m sorry you have to do it in a lousy political environment. But that’s where we are,” he said.

“Sorry that you had to deal with COVID, sorry that you had to deal with a pandemic. I’m sorry that you had to miss your family working seven days a week and I’m sorry then you have to be abused in the partisan politics of the day.”

His remarks, which appeared to have been scripted and were accompanied by slides reinforcing his message, came a day after the New York Law Journal reported that the FBI and the Brooklyn US Attorney’s Office had launched a probe of his COVID-19 task force following The Post’s revelation of private remarks by secretary to the governor Melissa DeRosa.

During a Feb. 10 virtual meeting with Democratic lawmakers, DeRosa said Cuomo’s administration withheld from them and the public the total number of nursing home residents killed by COVID-19 for fear the data would be “used against us” by the Department of Justice.

Cuomo’s rant also came amid an escalating feud with a growing, bipartisan group of lawmakers, including Assemblyman Ron Kim (D-Queens), who want to strip him of his emergency pandemic powers.

Kim — whose uncle died in a nursing home in April after suffering symptoms of COVID-19 — this week accused Cuomo of threatening him during a phone call prompted by critical remarks he made to The Post.

US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Queens) on Friday said she was joining with “our local officials calling for a full investigation of the Cuomo administration’s handling of nursing homes during COVID-19.”

Also during Friday’s news conference, Health Commissioner Howard Zucker defended his controversial March 25 directive for nursing homes to accept COVID-19 patients, which critics have blamed for spreading the deadly virus among vulnerable seniors.

Zucker said the state was “running out of ICU space” as hospitalizations were “doubling every three days.”

“With the facts that we had at that moment in time, it was the correct decision at that moment in time,” he said. (Rattled Cuomo Rants Against “Covid-19 Lies”.)

Like thuggish father, like thuggish son.

Well, before reviewing a bit of the infamous Cuomo thuggery that comes to Figlio di Sfachim very naturally, it is very important to note that New York State officials and hospital administrators inflated the number of those infected with the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus. Here is a review of what I wrote in “Sin: More Deadly Than the Coronavirus, part four,” last year:

One of the chief points made in Sin: More Deadly Than the Coronavirus, part three: Inflating the Numbers, concerned the fact that physicians and medical examiners are being encouraged to cite “Covid-19” as the cause of a person’s death even when no tests have been made to determine a cause. Dr. Deborah Birx, whose own unbearable condescension toward us in the peasant class of citizens will be examined later in this commentary, admitted that this was the case on Tuesday of Holy Week, April 7, 2020, that she had encouraged physicians and government officials do to precisely this (see Brix Admits Counting as Coronavirus Victims All Deaths Regardless of Underlying Conditions and Dr. Annie Bukacek’s Inflated Death Cornavirus Death Statistics), and a new video by Project Veritas shows that four funeral home directors in my native New York are saying that “Covid-19” is being put on almost every death certificate even without any testing. They are simply inflating the numbers, and they are doing this for Federal funds and to keep the crisis going until after the presidential election in the hope for a change of presidents and Democratic takeover of the United States Senate in January of 2021.  

Watch that video again in the event that you have forgotten about its contents as it is evidence, admittedly anecdotal but nevertheless representative of the truth of what continues to happen, of the extent of the lies told by the plandemicists, healthcare officials and the statists who jumped at the opportunity to act as tyrannically as they have long desired, and the line being taken by the likes of Andrew Mark Cuomo and Howard Zucker today continues the lies, especially if one considers that there were plenty of empty beds in the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center last year and thus no need to move infected patients into nursing homes as claimed by Zucker. The Javits Center was open for patients on March 27, 2020, the Feast of Saint John Damescene, just two days after Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo and Dr. Howard Zucker announced their decision to move those infected with the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus into nursing homes. Zucker, therefore, is simply not telling the truth about the supposed “unavailability” of intensive care unit beds.

Cuomo’s attempt to blame the United States Centers for Disease Control is also without merit as the March 13, 2020, CDC guidelines did not call for the indiscriminate placement of patients infected with the China/Chinese/Wuhan/Covid-19/Coronavirus in nursing homes:

Gov. Cuomo has repeatedly defended his administration’s directive for nursing homes to accept COVID-19 patients as the product of federal “guidance” — even though one of those government documents says only that infected seniors “can” be admitted to the facilities.

In contrast, the Health Department’s since-rescinded, March 25 memo left little wiggle room to prevent “medically stable” patients from being transferred out of hospitals to nursing homes.

“During this global health emergency, all NHs must comply with the expedited receipt of residents returning from hospitals to NHs,” the state directive said.

And if there was any doubt about what that meant, the following sentence was underlined: “No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the NH solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19.”

But a March 13 memo from the US Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services — which the Health Department has cited as justification for its order — contains a Q&A on that very subject.

“When should a nursing home accept a resident who was diagnosed with COVID-19 from a hospital?” it says.

“A nursing home can accept a resident diagnosed with COVID-19 and still under transmission-based Precautions for COVID-19 as long as the facility can follow CDC guidance for Transmission-Based Precautions. If a nursing home cannot, it must wait until these precautions are discontinued.”

The DOH directive — which cited an “urgent need to expand hospital capacity” — came under immediate fire from three health-care industry groups: AMDA-The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Medicine, the American Health Care Association and the National Center for Assisted Living. In a March 29 statement, the organizations said they were “deeply concerned” with the underlined portion of the order.

“This is a short-term and short-sighted solution that will only add to the surge in COVID-19 patients that require hospital care,” they said.

A former federal Health and Human Services official also told The Post that it was a potential recipe for disaster.

“[Cuomo] made this blanket requirement and some nursing homes may have not been prepared to have these patients and may have caused cross-contamination,” the ex-official said.

And on Thursday, a draft report by the Empire Center for Public Policy tied “several hundred and possibly more than 1,000” nursing home deaths to the March 25 directive, which it said is “associated with more than one in six of 5,780 nursing home deaths statewide be-tween late March and early May.”

A day earlier, Cuomo vehemently defended the policy, saying, “My health experts don’t believe it was wrong” and that if they did, “I would sue the federal government for malpractice.”

He stood by the policy again Friday, but at neither time ex-plained why he rescinded it under fire on May 10 and instead ordered that anyone being admitted to a nursing home had to first test negative for the coronavirus.

Health Commissioner Howard Zucker, who issued the March 25 directive, cited the March 13 Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidance during Friday’s news conference.

He inexplicably quoted a portion that says, “Nursing homes should admit any individuals that they would normally admit to their facility, including individuals from hospitals where a case of COV-ID-19 was/is present.” Zucker went on to refer to the part that says nursing homes “can” accept infected patients, noting that the need to follow “transmission-based precautions” was “very important.”

Zucker further read aloud from a March 23 guidance from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, saying, “The COVID-19 patients from hospitals should go to the facility with the ability to adhere to infection prevention and control recommendations for care of COVID-19 patients.”

“Preferably patients would be placed at a facility that has al-ready cared for COVID-19 cases,” he added.

Zucker noted that when he issued his order, the state was “running out of ICU space” because hospitalizations were “doubling every three days.”

“With the facts that we had at that moment in time, it was the correct decision at that moment in time,” he said. (Government Memorandum Crushes Cuomo Defense in Nursing Home Scandal.)

Not only are Cuomo and Zucker not telling the truth now, but Andrew Mark Cuomo’s legendary bullying ways, which New York State Assemblyman Ronald Tae Sok Kim, a Democrat, reports that he experienced, are coming to the forefront now that Assemblyman Kim has spoken out:

New York State Democratic Assemblywoman Yuh-Line Niou said Friday that her inbox is "flooded" with allegations of mistreatment from New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

"I kid you not....my text messages, my DMs, and my inbox are flooded with [C]uomo stories. So many people have been bullied, mistreated, or intimidated by him," she wrote in a tweet.

Niou's tweet came after Democratic New York State Assemblyman Ron Kim sounded the alarm this week on Cuomo's behavior, alleging that the governor threatened to "destroy" him in a spat over the state’s nursing home crisis.

A number of others with connections to the governor have posted accusations of bullying against Cuomo on social media after Kim spoke out about his conversation with him.

State Sen. Alessandra Biaggi said in a Wednesday statement that Cuomo's statements about Kim "are a part of a disturbing pattern of behavior from the [g]overnor."

It's not the first time Cuomo's political rivals have accused the longtime governor of bullying tactics, but new allegations are beginning to emerge after his administration confirmed that thousands more nursing home residents died of COVID-19 than the state's official tallies previously acknowledged.

Researchers have more recently revealed that Cuomo's directive to put COVID-19 patients in nursing homes as the virus took hold of New York in the spring of 2020 may have led to more than 1,000 fatalities, sparking outrage among his constituents. 

Cuomo and Kim, both Democrats, have engaged in a public war of words over what transpired on a phone call between the two last week. The conversation came hours after the New York Post reported that one of the governor’s aides, Melissa DeRosa, admitted the office withheld data on COVID-19 deaths at nursing homes.

In a series of media appearances, Kim alleged that Cuomo threatened to ruin the assemblyman’s career unless he walked back remarks to the Post in which he said the administration was "trying to dodge having any incriminating evidence."

While a top aide denied the governor ever threatened to "destroy" Kim, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, another frequent Cuomo combatant, backed up Kim’s claims during an appearance on MSNBC. The mayor suggested that Cuomo’s behavior was part of a lengthy history of intimidation.

"It’s a sad thing to say, but that’s classic Andrew Cuomo. A lot of people in New York state have received those phone calls. The bullying is nothing new," de Blasio said.

The focus on Cuomo comes as left-leaning CNN and host Chris Cuomo, the governor's brother, have given the Democrat's controversies little to no airtime.

Earlier during the pandemic, the network gave Chris Cuomo free rein to conduct friendly, comical interviews with the governor, who wrote a book about successfully handling the pandemic while it was ongoing and even received the International Emmy Founders Award in November for "his leadership during the Covid-19 pandemic and his masterful use of TV to inform and calm people around the world." (Stories of Couomo’s Bullying Abound.)

A reporter recounted her own experience at being bullied by the above-mentioned Melissa DeRosa, Andrew Mark Cuomo's gubernatorial secretary/chief of staff, in 2014 when she was writing for a publication named City and State:

It was 4:30 a.m., so I pulled the bathroom door shut in my one-bedroom Brooklyn apartment to answer the phone without waking my then-5-year-old. On the line was Melissa DeRosa, Gov. Cuomo’s then-communications director, now his second-in-command. She was threatening to destroy me.

By now, thanks to Queens Assemblyman Ron Kim blowing the whistle on the threats he received in a call from Cuomo, the public has a glimpse of the bullying practiced by the governor and his top brass.

Many Americans are shocked, having bought into the compassionate persona Cuomo conveyed in his pandemic briefings. But Kim’s revelations came as no surprise to anyone who has dealt with the governor. As one Albany insider texted me last week, “everyone has an Andrew Cuomo story.”

While the April 2014 call I received from DeRosa didn’t come directly from the governor, I knew it bore the full weight of his power. City & State, the New York politics magazine I edited at the time, was about to publish a story exposing Cuomo’s machinations to distort the final report issued by the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption.

The manipulation we documented put the lie to the governor’s public proclamation that it would be a fully independent body with the authority to probe graft in Albany wherever it found it. In reality, as soon as the commission touched the governor’s own office, he hastily shut it down.

I started getting pushback from the governor’s office as soon as we called requesting comment. In a barrage of calls, his media handlers pushed me to spike the article, alternately approaching me with carrot (a hot exclusive to be named later) and stick. By 4:30 a.m. — our piece was scheduled to publish at 5 — I was only getting the stick.

Seven years later, I don’t recall precisely everything DeRosa hurled at me, though I’m positive she vowed to “destroy” my career and take revenge on my publication. I remember vividly how I felt: scared.

I had no reason to think these were idle threats. I was fully aware of the governor’s volcanic temper and track record of vindictiveness. If he wanted to crush me, he could and likely would.

This was a serious gut check for me. I worried about losing my livelihood, damaging my future, letting down my wife and daughter. But fortunately, I had bosses and colleagues who stood by the quality of our work. So we published the piece, like the press is supposed to do in the face of intimidation.

I’m no hero. The members of the Albany press corps regularly endure abusive calls like I received. And sometimes those calls come from the governor himself.

Shrewdly, the governor rings up reporters out of the blue to praise them when he likes what they write. This personal touch wins him goodwill. Receiving such a call is something of a rite of passage for Albany reporters. Unfortunately, so too is getting a call from the governor when he’s breathing fire.

Cuomo doesn’t dispute that talking tough is what he does. He thinks it’s a virtue. But the abuse he privately metes out amounts to a systematic campaign to chill negative coverage of his administration. And it works.

Editors kill legitimate stories because of his threats; reporters shy away from promising tips; sources stay silent.

There are many reasons the media don’t expose the governor’s bullying. Albany reporters fear that if the governor freezes them out, they won’t be able to do their jobs effectively. Some journalists see speaking up as a violation of the unwritten code of “off-the-record” conversations. Others just assume that “everyone knows” how Cuomo operates, so it isn’t worth reporting.

For years, entertainment reporters justified their silence about the #MeToo monsters in the industry by telling themselves that “everyone knows.” But the public didn’t know. Many of the perpetrators’ future victims didn’t know. And so these thugs went on operating with impunity.

Until last week, most New Yorkers didn’t know about Cuomo’s despicable ways. But they should have. Journalists are agents of accountability. It’s time for New York’s reporters to step up and tell their own Cuomo stories. (Cuomo’s office terrorized me in 2014 for doing my job as a journalist.)

Andrew Mark Cuomo is a thug.

So was Mario Matthrew Cuomo.

Here is a trip down Cuomo Memory Lane to remind readers of this site that thuggish bullying is embedded in the family genetic code:

The late Mario Matthew Cuomo, who was Governor of the State of New York between 1983 and 1995, was not only content to support evil with his eloquent and passionately delivered rhetoric. This man had the temerity to telephone Catholic priests who had the courage to denounce his support of baby-killing under cover of law. One priest, the late Monsignor Edward Donnelly, who was the pastor of Holy Family Church in Hicksville, New York, at the time, hung up on Cuomo in the Fall of 1984 after the governor had gotten wind of a sermon the priest had preached.

“Bishop” Austin Vaughan, a man whose kindness and humility made an impression upon anyone who had the privilege of meeting him (as I did on several occasions), understood that Mario Matthew Cuomo was wrong and that he faced the strong possibility of eternal damnation for his expedient separation of supposedly “personal beliefs” from his duties as an elected official.

Although the late Father Austin Vaughan was not a true bishop, he was a true priest, and it was this priestly concern for the immortal soul of Mario Matthew Cuomo that prompted him, a putative auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of New York, to warn Cuomo that he was risking the fires of Hell for his support of child-killing under cover of the civil law.

Ever the demagogue, Cuomo accused Father Vaughan of “damning him to Hell.” Father Vaughan had done no such thing, of course.

Here is a report, contained in a June 29, 2000, obituary on "Bishop" Vaughan, about the controversy that erupted after he had made his remarks about Cuomo’s possible eternal damnation while he, Vaughan, was imprisoned after being arrested for peacefully blocking an abortuary as part of Operation Rescue in 1990:

Regarded as a conservative church leader, Bishop Vaughan was named auxiliary bishop by Pope Paul VI in 1977. He was a professor of theology at St. Joseph's Seminary in Yonkers from 1956 to 1973 and then its rector until 1979, when he was appointed vicar of Orange County. He was fluent in Spanish, Italian and French as well as Latin.

Bishop Vaughan took his firm stance against abortion well beyond the pulpit and went to jail for it more than once. In 1990, he spent 10 days in an Albany lockup for trespassing after he tried to block the entrance of a local women's clinic the year before.

While in jail, he caused a furor when he told an interviewer that Governor Cuomo was in ''serious risk of going to hell'' for upholding abortion rights and public financing of poor women's abortions. Mr. Cuomo responded that he would defend ''the right of this bishop to curse any politician he wants, and every woman to make her own judgment under the Constitution as to whether or not to have an abortion.''

Cardinal John J. O'Connor, writing in Catholic New York, the weekly newspaper of the archdiocese, noted that the bishop's views were consistent with church teaching. In his first sermon out of jail, at a Mass at St. Patrick's, his parish church in Newburgh, Bishop Vaughan said: ''All I was saying is what he learned, and I learned, and all of you learned in the first grade. If you commit a serious sin and die without repenting, you go to hell.'' (Bishop Austin B. Vaughan, 72Criticized Cuomo on Abortion.)

This applied to the late Mario Matthew Cuomo, and it applies to his son, Andrew Mark Cuomo, a public adulterer, and full-throated supporter of baby-killing and It applies also to President Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi and to every other pro-abortion public official, Catholic and non-Catholic alike. Support baby-killing only at the peril of eternal damnation.

Veteran journalist Frederic U. Dicker, who has covered state politics in Albany for decades now, wrote about Mario Matthew Cuomo's very public support of child-killing under cover of the civil law after noting Cuomo's penchant for arrogance:

I covered Mario Cuomo when he was New York’s secretary of state, lieutenant governor and governor for nearly 20 years, for three news organizations, and what a strange, infuriating and ultimately tragic experience it turned out to be.

To nearly all who knew Mario Cuomo well, he was an underachieving enigma — brilliant yet indecisive, accomplished as a lawyer yet riddled with self-doubt as a politician, an initially popular governor who was eventually booted from office for failing to use that popularity to lead New York in a direction that would have made this a better state.

Early in Cuomo’s service as lieutenant governor, Robert Morgado, Gov. Hugh Carey’s longtime chief of staff, startled me with the observation that Carey was convinced there was “something odd with Mario” — that he was arrogant, angry and often resentful toward those he worked with in public life.

As the years passed, I heard dozens of others close to Cuomo, including some who worked with him every day, echo Morgado’s words.

Mario Cuomo was one of the nation’s greatest orators, but his sometimes-dazzling speeches — like his keynote to the Democratic National Convention in San Francisco in 1984 — almost always lacked answers to the problems they addressed.

Cuomo insisted he was a believing Roman Catholic, but then he went to war with his church on the theologically crucial issue of abortion.

He was someone who claimed to have foresworn political labels but was actually a quintessential political liberal and, usually, proud of it.

People who knew him well often joked that Mario Cuomo was someone who was ready with a question for every answer.

He was called New York’s “Hamlet on the Hudson’’ because of a painful penchant for delaying — usually in the grips of agonizing indecision — virtually every important decision he had to make, most famously on whether he would run for president in 1988 and in 1992, years when the Democratic nomination could have been his for the seeking.

Cuomo, a brilliant and accomplished lawyer in his pre-political life, reinforced that “Hamlet’’ image when he repeatedly told friends he was comfortable serving as a defense lawyer even in cases involving accused murderers but could never be comfortable as a prosecutor because, he said, he never would feel sure enough that someone was guilty and therefore deserving of punishment.

While Cuomo could be charming in one-on-one conversations, could show a remarkable degree of caring when dealing with individual human tragedies, and could put aside ideological differences to help political adversaries — including the New York Post in the early 1990s, when it faced severe financial difficulties — he could also be arrogant and even cruel, browbeating opponents, abandoning longtime allies, and even turning on his own son and one-time key political adviser, New York’s current governor, Andrew.

Cuomo presided over the state’s highest office during the Reagan/Bush era, and because he was such a strong proponent of traditional liberal values — higher taxes to fund state spending on social programs, opposition to the death penalty, an unrelenting defense of abortion rights — he became a darling of the political left and of many in the national media.

But his legacy as governor was anything but positive.

Gov. Mario Cuomo raised literally hundreds of state taxes to fund ever-expanding social programs and developed fiscal gimmicks, including the notorious scheme to “sell’’ the Attica Correctional Facility back to the state to pad public revenues so he could spend even more.

Cuomo rejected a chance to end the hugely expensive tolls on the New York State Thruway and he literally destroyed, under pressure from environmental activists, the Long Island Lighting Co. and its $5 billion Shoreham nuclear power plant, saddling Long Island residents to this day with some of the highest utility costs in the nation.

Mario Cuomo presided over the widening loss of upstate jobs, industry and population, of which he was well aware. Either because he didn’t know how to address the problem or because, more likely, a deep streak of fatalism left him believing there was nothing he could do about it, the problem has continued to this day.

Although he didn’t initially realize he was doing so, David Garth — Cuomo’s longtime friend and political guru, who, coincidentally, died just a few weeks ago — encapsulated Mario Cuomo’s failures as governor a few months before he was turned out of office in 1994.

Garth was overseeing Cuomo’s bid for a fourth term and he was pressed at the Democratic nominating convention by several reporters to name some of the governor’s accomplishments during his term in office.

After several seconds of cold silence, a clearly uncomfortable Garth responded, “Haven’t you seen the new rest stops on the Thruway? They’re really something.’’

Such a singularly meager legacy from 12 years in office explained why a few months later, Cuomo — the great liberal champion who might very well have become president — was defeated by a little-known freshman state senator and former mayor of Peekskill, one George Elmer Pataki. (Frederic U. Dicker, Cuomo inspired but did little for New York.)

Cuomo’s bullying is thus nothing new for him as he has come by it very naturally. Unfortunately, for him, however, he, who enjoyed basking in his celebrity status last year, is now the subject of intense criticism for his original policy mistakes, the cover-up of the deaths of innocent human beings, and, now, his arrogant defiance and bullying in the face of withering criticism such as the editorial and news stories that follow directly below:

New York needs the truth about the Cuomo administration coverup of nursing-home deaths — and that means an independent federal investigation.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s top aide confessed privately this week that the administration suppressed the true COVID toll in the homes. She also offered an apology — not to the thousands of New York families who needlessly lost loved ones thanks to her boss’s mismanagement but to Democratic lawmakers put in a difficult “political position with the Republicans” by the coverup.

A federal investigation may be the only way to get the full truth of Team Cuomo’s order to nursing homes, populated by those most vulnerable to the virus, to take in COVID-positive patients. Not just the “what” of how many lives it cost, but the “why” behind this madness, and the months and months of coverup.

Melissa DeRosa, secretary to the governor, made the stunning statement on a video call with Democratic state lawmakers as she “explained” why the administration ignored since August their demands for nursing-home death data. It began when then-President Donald Trump “directs the Department of Justice to do an investigation into us,” she said. “And basically we froze.”

“Because then we were in a position where we weren’t sure if what we were going to give to the Department of Justice, or what we give to you guys, what we start saying, was going to be used against us while we weren’t sure if there was going to be an investigation,” she said.

Suppressing evidence for fear of federal prosecution — what did the administration have to hide?

Another problem: The state started hiding the info months earlier, long before Trump tweeted a thing.

Later in the call, she said the Biden Justice Department isn’t as interested in Team Cuomo’s malfeasance. “All signs point to they are not looking at this, they’ve dropped it,” she said.

Not when she’s admitted a coverup, they can’t. The feds must reopen a probe and subpoena Cuomo, DeRosa, and Health Commissioner Howard Zucker.

Perhaps a special counsel is needed. Cuomo has long and strong ties to Biden, who reportedly considered him for attorney general. Cuomo was even at the White House Friday, managing to avoid reporters as he met with the president and other governors to discuss stimulus legislation.

What truth we now have only came despite Team Cuomo’s best efforts. It took a damning report from Attorney General Tish James and a court order in a months-old Freedom of Information suit to get the Health Department to cough up anything.

And the lies keep getting exposed. It turns out the number of recovering patients sent to nursing homes early in the pandemic — 9,056 — is 40 percent higher than what the DOH claimed in its whitewashing July report. The state just released the new number in response to an Associated Press Freedom of Information request made back in May.

Upon hearing DeRosa’s admission, state Sen. Andrew Gounardes (D-Bay Ridge) called it a betrayal of the public trust.” Absolutely.

New York needs to get to the bottom of Cuomo & Co.’s pack of lies. The public needs the full truth — and accountability. (Cuomo Lied and Covered it up; We need a Federal investigation to find the truth.)

Start with this, governor: Apologize.

Say sorry to the thousands of New York families that lost a loved one in a nursing home in the wake of your deadly March 25 order that forced homes to accept contagious COVID patients.

Say sorry to the 20 million people of New York state, whom you’ve been deceiving for nearly a year about the nursing-home horrors.

Say sorry to all those you’ve blamed to distract from your own guilt, from the staffers at the homes to all the federal officials you’ve claimed are actually responsible for that order and/or your coverup.

Apologize, and quit trying to duck responsibility by promoting a pack of lies.

That’s what the governor was doing again Monday, in his first press conference since The Post broke the news that his top aide, Melissa DeRosa, admitted to Democratic legislators that the gov and his people intentionally covered up the truth for months.

Gov. Cuomo is sticking to his “Blame Trump” cover story, pretending that the coverup was motivated by fear that the then-president would somehow use the truth in a politicized federal investigation.

Then again, he’s spent months trying to blame the Trumpies for the original, deadly March order to nursing homes to accept COVID-contagious patients that hospitals wanted to dump on them, without question. Never mind that other states didn’t read the federal directive as requiring anything like that.

Monday, he even added a perverse twist: State lawmakers should have known the coverup was all about Trump, because The Post reported in August that a federal probe had begun.

Set aside the fact that then-Attorney General Bill Barr’s Justice Department was not taking improper orders from the White House (Barr is a complete straight-shooter, though many Democrats convinced themselves otherwise). The bigger problem is that the coverup started months before that.

Indeed, it seems to have started as soon as The Post’s Bernadette Hogan first revealed the existence of the deadly March 25 order by asking about it at a press conference weeks later. At that April 20 presser, the gov pretended he’d never heard of the order before. (And never mind that he is tight as a bug with the state hospital lobby, which plainly requested the order if only to clear beds for more urgent COVID cases. Nor that Cuomo is a notorious micromanager unlikely to let such a deadly mandate be issued without his personal signoff.)

It’s at about this point that the state Department of Health suddenly started reporting “nursing home COVID deaths” in a way unique to New York — leaving out residents who died only after transfer to a hospital. This, even as the DOH continued to record the full truth but refused to share it.

Indeed, the Cuomoites stonewalled Freedom of Information Law requests from the Empire Center and the Associated Press for most of the next year — again, starting long before the feds showed any interest.

The state only finally started releasing that info after 1) Attorney General Tish James’ report outlined the basic fact that the nursing-home death toll was 50 percent higher than Cuomo or Health Commissioner Howard Zucker had been admitting, and 2) a judge outright ordered the DOH to comply with the Empire Center FOIL request.

Oh, and none of this explains why Zucker didn’t effectively rescind the deadly order until May — long after it had become clear that hospitals didn’t need to dump infectious patients on nursing homes unprepared for the challenge, because the hospitals weren’t actually running out of bed space.

“Blame Trump” is far from the only lie the governor persists in pitching. On Monday he returned to blaming nursing-home staff for willfully accepting the infectious patients in the first place — something the James report said there was no evidence of.

More: If the coverup were really just about Trump, why did Cuomo and Zucker spend months claiming New York’s nursing-home COVID death rate was below the national average, when they knew the real figures showed it wasn’t? Even if Trump were after them, that didn’t require them to actively deceive the public.

Many regular New Yorkers lost loved ones because of the March 25 order, and they won’t stay silent. Many legislators (some of whom also lost family) are also furious at the Team Cuomo stonewalling and lies.

Will that be enough to get the Legislature’s Democratic leadership to stop protecting Cuomo and allow serious hearings into this horror? At minimum, they should agree with Assembly Minority Leader Will Barclay’s call for a special session to rescind the pandemic emergency powers that the governor has so abused.

And will President Biden’s Justice Department do the right thing and open a major independent zxxinvestigation? The need for some special counsel to oversee it now seems obvious, since DeRosa has family ties to the top Justice official, while Cuomo was a close Biden ally through the 2020 campaign.

It’s up to the governor’s fellow Democrats to hold him to account. If they don’t, they’re part of the coverup too. (Start Apologizing, Governor Cuomo, and Stop the Lies.)

The FBI and the Eastern District of New York US Attorney’s office have opened an investigation into Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s handling of nursing homes amid the coronavirus pandemic, sources said.

The probe is examining the Cuomo administration’s actions relating to the nursing homes and other long-term care facilities after thousands of their residents died of COVID-19, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

In its early-stages, the investigation is focusing on some senior members of Cuomo’s coronavirus task force, according to The Times Union, which first reported its existence.

Cuomo’s administration has faced fierce criticism for a since-rescinded March 25 state Health Department directive ordering nursing homes to admit infected patients being discharged from hospitals. 

Critics have argued the Health Department order contributed to the state’s high nursing home death toll, along with the spread of the virus.

The controversy was heightened last month when state Attorney General Letitia James released a damning report saying the state likely undercounted the nursing home COVID-19 death toll by more than 50 percent.

The discrepancy, the report said, was the result of the state not disclosing how many nursing home residents died in hospitals.

The AG report also found some nursing homes apparently underreported resident COVID-19 deaths to the state.

Following the report, Health Commissioner Howard Zucker, a state coronavirus task force member, finally released revised figures showing the combined total was 12,743 as of Jan. 19.

Just a day earlier, the DOH was only publicly acknowledging 8,711 deaths in nursing homes.

As of Monday, a total of 13,432 nursing home residents had been killed by COVID-19, Department of Health figures.

The updated figures released by Zucker came after months of stonewalling by the Cuomo administration.

Repeated requests from lawmakers and the media for the number of nursing home resident deaths in hospitals were ignored.

The administration also fought a Freedom of Information lawsuit filed by the Empire Center for Public Policy.

The turmoil continued last week, when The Post exclusively revealed the governor’s office hid nursing home death numbers from the state legislature.

Cuomo’s top aide, DeRosa, privately admitted to Democratic lawmakers that the administration withheld the data over fears it would be “used against us” by federal prosecutors.

DeRosa, also a state coronavirus task force member, told the lawmakers the administration “froze,” citing a Trump-era Department of Justice investigation into the state.

The bombshell admission by DeRosa led to calls for an investigation from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

Responding to news of the federal probe, Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi said, “As we publicly said, DOJ has been looking into this for months. We have been cooperating with them and we will continue to.” (Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Attorney Probing Cuomo’s Nursing Home Death Scandal.)

As a native New Yorker, I have enough cynicism in my creaky, arthritic bones to think that Cuomo will come out of these investigations politically bruised but, unlike those Capitol Hill rioters who did not engage in violent actions and who treated their escapade in the Capitol building as an enjoyable lark, will escape any criminal charges even though he is as morally responsible for the thousands of deaths in nursing homes last year as he is for his supporting for and funding of the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means.

Statists are insufferably arrogant.

Statists are invariably elitist.

Statists believe that they have to answer to no one, including Christ the King Himself as they do not believe in the Particular Judgment and the perils of hell that await them for their unrepentant support of grave evils and their illegitimate restriction of human liberty to accomplish the “global reset of humanity” will give them unlimited opportunities to act as lords of this world.

Statists arbitrarily lord it over others while doing as they please even during the midst of what they call a “global pandemic” by refusing to adhere to their own rules and regulations that they claim, usually with an air of sanctimony and righteous indignation, are essential to “stop the spread” of a virus that kills far less than one percent of infected persons.

Joining this pantheon of self-righteous hypocrites that includes among its ranks California Governor Gavin Christopher Newsom, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer is the current Governor of New Mexico, Michelle Lujan Grisham, who flouted her own rules last year and continues to do so:

Yesterday, we told you about Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer offering up dubious explanations for her husband throwing his weight as the governor’s husband around at a northern Michigan marina where he wanted to get his boat on the water early, despite Whitmer’s public guidance against travel to the area.

Democratic Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker got huffy late last month when confronted about his wife traveling to his family’s equestrian estate in Florida despite his stay-at-home order, and last week, he got caught sending Illinois construction workers to Wisconsin to work on his new home and horse farm.

And then there’s Democratic Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who expected Virginians to walk around in masks while not wearing one himself.

Looks like they’ve got company in Democratic New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham:

More from KRQE:

In early April, Gov. Lujan Grisham stressed that New Mexicans needed to stay home and should only go out for essential items such as food. She also announced that all non-essential businesses were closed. “We are in really tough financial times as a state. It mirrors the incredible, personal sacrifices that happen every single day because people have limited their ability to work, telecommuting and many people, in fact, have lost their jobs,” said Gov. Lujan Grisham on April 3rd.

However, just days after the April 3rd news conference and a week before Easter, KRQE News 13 has learned that Gov. Lujan Grisham called an employee at Lilly Barrack on Paseo to buy expensive jewelry. The jewelry was bought over the phone, but the employee went to the store, got the jewelry and placed it outside the door of the store where someone who knew the governor picked it up. This is according to the person who runs Lilly Barrack stores. She says she didn’t know about it until after it happened. She also said no one was allowed in the stores at that time due to the public health order.

The governor refused an on-camera interview but has a different version of the story. In an email from a governor spokesman, he says that “Lujan Grisham did call an employee, saying they had a longstanding personal relationship. The employee came here [Lilly Barrack], got the jewelry and took it home, left it outside their home and then someone came and picked it up.” (Michelle Luhan Grisham Reportedly Had Jewelry Store Brief Open to Buy Herself Something Pretty May 27, 2020.)

New Mexico’s Democrat governor is on the defensive after a report this week detailed her office’s spending from a taxpayer-supported expense fund.

Records show Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham spent nearly $13,500 over a six-month period in 2020 on items such as groceries, dry cleaning and alcohol, the Sante Fe New Mexican reported.

The booze spending included a purchase in September of more than $200 for five bottles of tequila, two bottles of vodka, two bottles of Merlot and single bottles of whiskey and gin, the report said.

In the same report, the newspaper disclosed that Grisham was hosting in-person staff meetings at the governor’s mansion at the same time that she was urging the public against mixing households in order to help stop the spread of the coronavirus.

About half the $13,500 went toward food for the governor’s Cabinet members and staffers during those meetings, Grisham spokesman Tripp Stelnicki told The Associated Press.

State Republicans were outraged by the governor’s use of taxpayer cash.

"I didn’t realize the governor was so underpaid that she has to use discretionary money for things that she should be paying for herself," state House Minority Whip Rod Montoya, a Republican, told the New Mexican. "Legislators are all up here doing our job, and we’re doing it on per diem."

"It’s not what tax dollars ought to be spent for," New Mexico House Minority Leader Jim Townsend of Artesia told the paper. "In a time when people are hurting all over the state, using their tax dollars to buy Wagyu beef has got to be a little bit disenchanting to many people.

"I think it’s just more of indication of the problem that we have had, and the governor has had, connecting with people," he added.

After the newspaper’s report appeared, Grisham addressed the matter Friday during a virtual news conference.

"I don’t want New Mexicans to feel like I don’t take seriously their hardship," Grisham told reporters.

Grisham said she did not personally make the purchases. Instead, they were made by a "woman who works here [who] is a rock star," the New Mexican reported.

On Thursday, Stelnicki explained the $200 booze purchase. He said it was for a planned holiday party that was ultimately canceled. He claimed the purchased bottles of alcohol remained unopened.

The spending came despite a state law enacted in 2019 that set new limits on use of the governor’s discretionary funds. That law was signed by Grisham’s predecessor, former Gov. Susana Martinez, a Republican who also took criticism for how her office spent cash, the New Mexican reported.

Grisham, 61, a native of New Mexico who is in her first term as governor after serving in the U.S. House and prior to that as the state’s health secretary, has taken heat from businesses because of her coronavirus restrictions.

In December, sources told Fox News she turned down an offer to serve as interior secretary in the Biden administration. (New Mexico Democratic Governor Spent Taxpayer Cash on Groceries and Liquor.)

These sad people do not realize that they must indeed face Christ the King when they die, something that Saint Alphonsus de Liguori explained in his sermon for the First Sunday of Lent:

3. “Be not without fear about sins forgiven, and add not sin to sin.” (Eccl. v. 5.) Say not then, O sinner; As God has forgiven me other sins, so he will pardon me this one if I commit it. Say not this; for, if to the sin which has been forgiven you add another, you have reason to fear that this new sin shall be united to your former guilt, and that thus the number will be completed, and that you shall be abandoned. Behold how the Scripture unfolds this truth more clearly in another place. “The Lord patiently expecteth, that when the day of judgment shall come, he may punish them in the fullness of sins.” (2 Mac. vi. 14.) God waits with patience until a certain number of sins is committed, but, when the measure of guilt is filled up, he waits no longer, but chastises the sinner. "Thou hast sealed up my offences as it were in a bag." (Job xiv. 17.) Sinners multiply their sins without keeping any account of them; but God numbers them that, when the harvest is ripe, that is, when the number of sins is completed, he may take vengeance on them. “Put ye in the sickles, for the harvest is ripe.” (Joel iii. 13.)  

4. Of this there are many examples in the Scriptures. Speaking of the Hebrews, the Lord in one place says: “All the men that have tempted me now ten times. . . . shall not see the land.” (Num. xiv. 22, 23.) In another place he says, that he restrained his vengeance against the Amorrhites, because the number of their sins was not completed.” For as yet the iniquities of the Amorrhites are not at the full.” (Gen. xv. 16.) We have again the example of Saul, who, after having disobeyed God a second time, was abandoned. He entreated Samuel to interpose before the Lord in his behalf. “Bear, I beseech thee, my sin, and return with me, that I may adore the Lord,” (1 Kings xv. 25.) But, knowing that God had abandoned Saul, Samuel  answered: “I will not return with thee; because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee," etc. (v. 26.) Saul, you have abandoned God, and he has abandoned you. We have another example in Balthassar, who, after having profaned the vessels of the temple, saw a hand writing on the wall, "Mane, Thecel, Phares." Daniel was requested to expound the meaning of these words. In explaining the word Thecel, he said to the king: “Thou art weighed in the balance, and art found wanting.” (Dan. v 27.) By this explanation he gave the king to understand that the weight of his sins in the balance of divine justice had made the scale descend.” The same night, Balthassar, the Chaldean king, was killed." (Dan. v. 30.) Oh! how many sinners have met with a similar fate! Continuing to offend God till their sins amounted to a certain number they have been struck dead and sent to hell. “They spend their days in wealth, and in a moment they go down to hell.” (Job xxi. 13.) Tremble, brethren, lest, if you commit another mortal sin, God should cast you into hell.  

5. If God chastised sinners the moment they insult him, we should not see him so much despised. But, because he does not instantly punish their transgressions, and because, through mercy, he restrains his anger and waits for their return, they are encouraged to continue to offend him. “For, because sentence is not speedily pronounced against the evil, the children of men commit evil without any fear.” (Eccles. viii. 11.) But it is necessary to be persuaded that, though God bears with us, he does not wait, nor bear with us forever. Expecting, as on former occasions, to escape from the snares of the Philistines, Samson continued to allow himself to be deluded by Dalila. “I will go out as I did before, and shake myself.” (Judges xvi. 20.) But “the Lord was departed from him.” Samson was at length taken by his enemies, and lost his life. The Lord warns you not to say: I have committed so many sins, and God has not chastised me. Say not: I have sinned, and what harm hath befallen me? For the Most High is a patient rewarder.” (Eccl. v. 4.) God has patience for a certain term, after which he punishes the first and last sins. And the greater has been his patience, the more severe his vengeance.

6. Hence, according to St. Chrysostom, God is more to be feared when he bears with sinners than when he instantly punishes their sins. “Plus timendum est, cum tolerat quam cum festinanter punit.” And why? Because, says St. Gregory, they to whom God has shown most mercy, shall, if they do not cease to offend him, be chastised with the greatest rigour. “Quos diutius expectat durius damnat.” The saint adds that God often punishes such sinners with a sudden death, and does not allow them time for repentance.” Sæpe qui diu tolerati sunt subita morte rapiuntur, ut necflere ante mortem liceat." And the greater the light which God gives to certain sinners for their correction, the greater is their blindness and obstinacy in sin. "For it had been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than, after they had known it, to turn back." (2 Pet. ii. 21.) Miserable the sinners who, after having been enlightened, return to the vomit. St Paul says, that it is morally impossible for them to be again converted. “For it is impossible for those who were once illuminated have tasted also the heavenly gifts, ... and are fallen away, to be renewed again to penance." (Heb. vi. 4, 6.)  

7. Listen, then, sinner, to the admonition of the Lord: “My son, hast thou sinned? Do so no more, but for thy former sins pray that they may be forgiven thee." (Eccl. xxi. 1.) Son, add not sins to those which you have already committed, but be careful to pray for the pardon of your past transgressions; otherwise, if you commit another mortal sin, the gates of the divine mercy may be closed against you, and your soul may be lost forever. When, then, beloved brethren, the devil tempts you again to yield to sin, say to yourself: If God pardons me no more, what shall become of me for all eternity? Should the Devil, in reply, say: “Fear not, God is merciful ;" answer him by saying: What certainty or what probability have I, that, if I return again to sin, God will show me mercy or grant me pardon? Because the threat of the Lord against all who despise his calls: "Behold I have called and you refused. . . I also will laugh in your destruction, and will mock when that shall come to you which you feared." (Prov. i. 24, 26.) Mark the words I also; they mean that, as you have mocked the Lord by betraying him again after your confession and promises of amendment, so he will mock you at the hour of death. “I will laugh and will mock. But God is not mocked.” (Gal. vi. 7.) “As a dog,” says the Wise Man, “that returneth to his vomit, so is the fool that repeateth his folly.” (Prov. xxvi. 11.) B. Denis the Carthusian gives an excellent exposition of this text. He says that, as a dog that eats what he has just vomited, is an object of disgust and abomination, so the sinner who returns to the sins which he has detested and confessed, becomes hateful in the sight of God.” Sicut id quod per vomitum est rejectum, resumere est valide abominabile ac turpe sic peccata deleta reiterari."  

8. O folly of sinners! If you purchase a house, you spare no pains to get all the securities necessary to guard against the loss of your money; if you take medicine, you are careful to assure yourself that it cannot injure you; if you pass over a river, you cautiously avoid all danger of falling into it; and for a transitory enjoyment, for the gratification of revenge, for a beastly pleasure, which lasts but a moment, you risk your eternal salvation, saying: "I will go to confession after I commit this sin." And when, I ask, are you to go to confession? You say: “On tomorrow." But who promises you tomorrow? Who assures you that you shall have time for confession, and that God will not deprive you of life, as he has deprived so many others, in the act of sin? “Diem tenes,” says St. Augustine, “qui horam non tenes.” You cannot be certain of living for another hour, and you say: “I will go to confession tomorrow.” Listen to the words of St. Gregory: “He who has promised pardon to penitents, has not promised tomorrow to sinners.” (Hom. xii. in Evan). God has promised pardon to all who repent; but he has not promised to wait till tomorrow for those who insult him. Perhaps God will give you time for repentance, perhaps he will not. But, should he not give it, what shall become of your soul? In the meantime, for the sake of a miserable pleasure, you lose the grace of God, and expose yourself to the danger of being lost for ever.  

9. Would you, for such transient enjoyments, risk your money, your honour, your possessions, your liberty, and your life? No, you would not. How then does it happen that, for a miserable gratification, you lose your soul, heaven, and God? Tell me: do you believe that heaven, hell, eternity, are truths of faith? Do you believe that, if you die in sin, you are lost for ever? Oh! what temerity, what folly is it, to condemn yourself voluntarily to an eternity of torments with the hope of afterwards reversing the sentence of your condemnation! "Nemo," says St. Augustine, “sub spe salutis vultæ grotare.” No one can be found so foolish as to take poison with the hope of preventing its deadly effects by adopting the ordinary remedies. And you will condemn yourself to hell, saying that you expect to be afterwards preserved from it. Folly! which, in conformity with the divine threats, has brought, and brings every day, so many to hell. “Thou hast trusted in thy wickedness, and evil shall come upon thee, and thou shalt not know the rising thereof.” (Isa. xlvii. 10, 11.) You have sinned, trusting rashly in the divine mercy: the punishment of your guilt shall fall suddenly upon you, and you shall not know from whence it comes. What do you say? What resolution do you make? If, after this sermon, you do not firmly resolve to give yourself to God, I weep over you, and regard you as lost. (Saint Alphonsus de Ligouri, First Sunday of Lent, “On the Number of Sins Beyond Which God Pardons No More,” pp. 63-67.)

We must pray for the conversion of this arrogant statists, whose immortal souls have been redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as it is still remains a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God. These men and women are certainly being used by Our Lord to chastise all for our sins, our indifference, our worldliness and our lukewarmness. However, these men and women are, like Judas before them and like us all, still responsible before Our Divine King for the injustices they continue to commit in the name of “public health and safety” without realizing for a moment that sin is more deadly than any human sickness, including the coronavirus.

False Premises Began the Plandemic and Falsehoods Continue to Push Back the Goalposts

The plandemic was launched to provide an excuse for statists to lock us down to shut us up. Their efforts are all tied to the World Economic Forum’s agenda of the “global reset of humanity” that I believe certain are auspicious rumblings from the adversary of the actions that will be taken by the Antichrist who is yet to come.

Consider these facts about the World Economic Forum’s agenda:

There is an urgent need for global stakeholders to cooperate in simultaneously managing the direct consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. To improve the state of the world, the World Economic Forum is starting The Great Reset initiative.

The Covid-19 crisis, and the political, economic and social disruptions it has caused, is fundamentally changing the traditional context for decision-making. The inconsistencies, inadequacies and contradictions of multiple systems –from health and financial to energy and education – are more exposed than ever amidst a global context of concern for lives, livelihoods and the planet. Leaders find themselves at a historic crossroads, managing short-term pressures against medium- and long-term uncertainties.

As we enter a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery, this initiative will offer insights to help inform all those determining the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons. Drawing from the vision and vast expertise of the leaders engaged across the Forum’s communities, the Great Reset initiative has a set of dimensions to build a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being. (The Great Reset.)

It would be naïve indeed to think that these ideas alone can bring about global peace. However, listening to the overlap between speeches of perceived rivals, there are opportunities to achieve equal vaccine distribution, sustainable economic growth, and achievable climate action.

As with any negotiation or debate, leaders must find a common ground to develop a long-term agreement and strategy. Vaccine deployment has not yet stopped the global pandemic and climate change projections could make COVID-19 seem like a minor incident. Leaders can begin to find the common ground needed to build meaningful global cooperation by taking the following steps.

1. Embrace humility, inclusivity and transparency

Finding common ground between Xi Jinping, Emmanuel Macron and Vladimir Putin may seem impossible, however, each of them emphasized the importance of placing humans at the heart of global cooperation efforts.

President Xi advocated for mutual respect and finding common ground to allow civilization to thrive. President Macron highlighted the critical steps that nations took in putting human lives above the global economy when tackling the COVID-19 pandemic. And President Putin stressed that the economy must no longer view people as a means to an end but place them at the centre of our responses.

To enact this response, inclusivity arose as a crucial element to ensure every citizen feels like a part of the solution. In the United States, this requires the new administration to come back to negotiating tables “with humility” as John Kerry underlined in his new role as Presidential Envoy for Climate. For King Abdullah II of Jordan and Korean President Moon Jae-in, only an inclusive approach, leaving no-one behind can strengthen the multilateral system enough to lift the billions of people who have been economically hit by COVID-19.

Without openness, misinformation and distrust continue to rise, threatening to keep us in today’s “post-truth climate”, according to Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs, Kang Kyung-wha. Transparency was crucial in her government’s response to COVID-19 through information-sharing by scientists, who ensured an adequate response. For Lysa John Berna, Secretary-General of Civicus, we are entering a decade of impatience. Twenty-five per cent of people are unable to exercise their freedoms, creating mobs that could be addressed by transparent governments willing to engage in real dialogue. Despite very different domestic discourses, openness and humility resonated as the pivotal principles to achieve global cooperation.

From mounting trade wars to continued techno-nationalism, healthy competition seems impossible in today’s political climate. And yet, President Xi stated that “difference in itself is no cause for alarm” but “what does ring alarm is arrogance, prejudice and hatred”. This was echoed by Minister Kang, who said that being a liberal democracy doesn’t mean that you should not work with countries that do not share the same values. This does not mean that democracies should ignore principles like human rights and freedom of expression for any action, but to cooperate, reach out, understand, and collaborate.

Private-public cooperation will play a major role in ensuring collaboration. Minister François-Phillippe Champagne stated that governments can do big things but with the private sector, they can do big things quickly. President Moon also pointed out that, through this kind of collaboration, Korea was able to produce diagnostic kits and vaccines rapidly and avoided discrimination based on age, health, or nationality. Through mindful collaboration and embracing competition, partners can willingly join together and ensure a cooperative response.

Tied to this collaboration is the healthy competition needed to incentivize cooperation. Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, pointed out that competition is healthy within a corporate environment but not while conducting strategic policies. This was enforced by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s address noting that issues like international taxation and competition are necessary because acting alone will not be sufficient for innovation.

However, global competition must be properly balanced by all governments with leaders from Argentina, South Africa and Singapore raising fears of vaccine nationalism. A fear of abandonment is already creating significant risk of losing the trust and energy needed for collaboration.

3. Re-invigorate, reform, and empower existing institutions

To ensure balanced competition and collaboration, there were strong calls to reflect on existing frameworks and institutions and build back a multilateral framework that works for all.

Chancellor Merkel noted that institutions like the World Trade Organization are critical to the world and that to thrive there need to be revisions with common standards that reflect current work conditions, the environment, and answers regarding the digitalization of the economy.

President Macron and the United Nations Secretary General António Guterres emphasized the importance of ensuring an equitable framework. President Macron stated the need of a capitalist system that lifts everyone out of poverty and prevents an increase in inequalities. Secretary General Guterres suggested a new social contract between governments, peoples, civil society, and businesses enabling all members of society to live in dignity.

King Abdullah II and Singaporean Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, underscored the importance of “re-globalizing” and instituting a system that allows for a sustainable and equitable recovery. Prime Minister Lee did not hide the fact that recalibration will be needed on the part of China and the United States, with China needing to take “greater responsibility for providing global public goods” and the United States avoiding seeing China only as a threat.

In recalibrating existing institutions to reflect the political realities that are impacting people’s lives, leaders can build a sustainable system of global governance. While the degree of change may differ, the world is at a critical junction where humility, collaboration and institutional reform can ensure true, sustainable global cooperation. (The Davos Agenda Outlined a Path for Global Cooperation.)

What does this mean?

Oh, this is so very simple to explain.

This means that the World Economic Forum, another wholly owned subsidiary of the so-called “People’s Republic of China,” wants all criticism of the Chicoms to cease and for everyone to accept the Communist Chinese system of repression, social credits, prison camps for “thought crimes” (“reeducation centers"), and the use of constant social monitoring, including the use of snitches found among family, friends, neighbors, supervisors, fellow workers, police officers, without any complaint. The “Great Reset” is all about imposing Communism on the entire world in the name of “dealing with” the “crisis” caused by the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus and the never-ending specter of the “global climate change” crisis.

Here are two analyses of the World Economic Forum’s thinly-disguised efforts to reset us all according to the likeness of Xi Jinping’s Red Chinese system of statist collectivism:

The dystopian novel "Brave New World" was written in 1931 by visionary Aldous Huxley.

In his book, the author describes what life is like in a society that is under complete domination of a group of hardened autocrats.

It's a tyrannical tale with a twist, however.

Members of this society are kept in a state of perpetual bliss, despite having every aspect of their lives from birth to death controlled by a power-drunk ruling class.

It's a society in which power is concentrated in the hands of a few, communication of information is meticulously managed, and endless distractions prevent people from thinking, reasoning, or imagining.

A drug is routinely dispensed to the masses (soma), so as to facilitate the exile of perceptible sensations of pain, stress, or anxiety.

Unhappiness is avoided through excessive indulgences in materialism, sexual promiscuity, and altered states of mind.

A synthetic religion substitutes for authentic faith.

Technology is God, and as such is worshiped and adored ("Ford's in his flivver"). Pre-conditioned slaves delight in their own enslavement.

Enduring human connections are reflexively thought of as repulsive.

The optimum relationship status is summed up in seven short words of the state maxim: "Every one belongs to every one else."

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, recently appeared on Prager U's "The Book Club" to discuss Huxley’s "Brave New World."

In an engaging discussion with host Michael Knowles, the senator pointed out that slogans of the government "sound wonderful but they’re all about destroying self, destroying who you are."

The ultra-totalitarian state in Huxley's fictional world is splattered with virtuous sounding slogans. But as Sen. Cruz explained, global governance, the likes of which is seen in "Brave New World," is "designed to produce a subservient collective."

Sen. Cruz also talked about the many parallels in Huxley’s "Brave New World" to the communism of today, explaining that in the modern world, communism "is the ultimate totalitarian communal state."

It just so happens that, in the real world, there is a group called the World Economic Forum (WEF). The group is comprised of a number of ruling class elites, who meet on a regular basis to determine the political, ideological, and societal direction of the world.

Attendees of the WEF include a host of global government advocates, such as chief executives of Big Tech, the U.N. secretary general, the president of the European Central Bank, the secretary general of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, union leaders from select countries, and representatives of left-wing political and environmental organizations.

Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the WEF, recently wrote an article titled "2021 Should be Year of the 'Great Reset.'"

In the article, Schwab proposed that 2021 be designated as the new "Year Zero."

Schwab borrowed the term "Year Zero" from the year immediately after World War II, a time when the world had to be rebuilt following the devastation that had occurred in war-torn regions.

"This time [2021] the focus is on the material world but also on so much more. We must aim for a higher degree of societal sophistication and create a sound basis for the well-being of all people and the planet," Schwab wrote.

He contends that free markets and limited government, which have actually produced decades of prosperity and progress, constitute instead a model that, in his words, has “broken down.”

Consequently, the world, in his opinion, is in dire need of The Great Reset, and 2021 is the perfect year for the launch.

Eerily, the model that the Davos elites are proposing is strikingly similar to the one that Huxley previewed for us all.

One word, albeit unspoken, hangs over all of the cunningly crafted phrases that describe The Great Reset. That word is control.

The final outcome that promoters of The Great Reset envision is one of a highly regulated society, a massively intrusive government, the annihilation of individual liberties, and a centrally planned economy.

At the June 2020 meeting of the group, members expressed the idea that the COVID pandemic could be used as a means of implementing their radical agenda.

While at the meeting, Prince Charles said, "We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis."

In June of 2020, Schwab wrote the following: "The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world."

He also disclosed the expansive nature of the reset, suggesting that "all aspects of our societies and economies must be revamped, from education, to social contracts and working conditions."

Much like the society in "Brave New World" the WEF envisions a populace that is sufficiently content with being manipulated.

A video promoted by the WEF declares that by 2030, "You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy."

Viewers are presented with footage of drone deliveries of goods that put the smiles on consumers’ faces.

Let’s stop and take a brief look at what has happened over the past ten months to so many people here in our own country and around the world:

—Millions have been deprived of individual freedoms at the hands of authoritarian leaders.

—Millions have witnessed the destruction of their businesses and livelihoods.

—Millions have been denied the opportunity to work and have endured severe economic hardship as a result.

—Millions have been living under strict mask mandates and social distance dictates.

—Millions have been forced out of their places of worship.

—Millions have been barred from attending school on campus grounds.

—Millions have had curfews imposed upon them.

—Millions have had neighbors, co-workers, members of the community, and digital devices monitor them and report them to the authorities.

—Millions have had their speech curtailed on social media platforms.

The list of infringement upon our freedoms at the hands of modern day autocrats goes on forever.

I think in order to avoid our own "Brave New World," we need to counter The Great Reset with The Great Return.

The return to freedom. (The Great Covid Reset. See also Pandemic Lockdowns Show the Elites’ Totalitarian Instincts.)

This is a good summary of the situation that God has known from all eternity would unfold before our own mortal eyes but through which we must see with the supernatural eyes of our immortal souls and then assess with the Supernatural Gift of Faith that illumines our minds with the deeper realities and to remind us that we are in the loving hands of Our Lady at all times.

Moreover, we do not need a return to the modern concept of “freedom” that got us into this mess and that was intended by the adversary to degenerate over time into the totalitarianism being imposed upon us now as a “freedom” detached and dissevered from the Holy Cross of Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, is actually slavery to the devil himself no matter how it is disguised by the use of panegyric sloganeering.

The author of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, gave an interview to the then chain-smoking Mike Wallace in 1961 in which he commented on how the draconian measures he wrote about in fictional terms were coming true before the world's very eyes at that time sixty years ago. Dr. Joseph Mercola provided a link to the interview and summarized it as follows:

The video above features a 1958 interview of Aldous Huxley with Mike Wallace. It really is a great glimpse from the past. Wallace was smoking on the set, but that was natural back then, and Rod Serling, who produced the “Twilight Zone,” did the same. Interestingly, they both developed lung cancer.

You might recall that Huxley wrote the classic novel “Brave New World,” in which he presents a dystopian vision of a future society known as the “World State,” a society ruled by science and efficiency, where emotions and individuality have been eradicated and personal relationships are few.

Children are cloned and bred in “hatcheries,” where they are conditioned for their role in society from an early age. There are no mothers and fathers as natural procreation is outlawed. There are no family units.

Embryos are sorted and given hormonal treatments based on their destined societal classification, which from highest to lowest are Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Epsilon. The Alphas are bred and conditioned to be leaders while the Epsilons are designed for menial labor, free of higher intellectual capacities.

At the time Huxley wrote the book in 1931 (it was published the year after), optimism about technological advancements were high and there was widespread belief that technology would solve many of the world’s problems. “Brave New World” demonstrates the naiveté of such hopes by showing what can happen when technocracy is taken to its extreme.

Huxley believed his world of horror was right around the corner and, today, just shy of 60 years later, we’re starting to see Huxley’s “World State” closing in around us in the form of the Fourth Industrial Revolution’s transhumanist agenda and the Great Reset, designed to trap us inside a net of constant surveillance and external control.

Enemies of Freedom

Huxley also penned a series of essays called “Enemies of Freedom,” which he discusses in the featured interview. The series outlines “impersonal forces” that are “pushing in the direction of progressively less freedom,” and “technological devices” that can be used to accelerate the process by imposing ever greater control of the population.

Huxley points out that as technology becomes more complex and complicated, it becomes increasingly necessary to form more elaborate hierarchal organizations to manage it all. Technology also allows for more effective propaganda machines that can be managed through those same control hierarchies.

Huxley cites the success of Hitler, noting that aside from Hitler’s effective use of terror and brute force, “he also used a very efficient form of propaganda. He had the radio, which he used to the fullest extent, and was able to impose his will on an immense mass of people.”

With the advent of television, Huxley foresaw how an authoritarian leadership could become a source of “a one-pointed drumming” of a single idea, effectively brainwashing the public.

Beyond that, Huxley predicted the technological capability to “bypass the rational side of man” and manipulate behavior by influencing people on a subconscious level. This is precisely what we’re faced with today.

Google, but also to a large extent Facebook, has been collecting data on you for nearly two decades. They have created massive server farms that are capable of analyzing this data with deep learning and artificial intelligence software to mine information and generate incredibly precise details on just what type of propaganda and narrative is required to surreptitiously manipulate you into the behavior they are seeking.

Huxley also points out the dangers inherent in advertising, especially as it pertains to marketing of political ideas and ideologies:

“Democracy depends on the individual voter making an intelligent and rational choice for what he regards as his enlightened self-interest in any given circumstance but …

There are particular purposes for selling goods, and [what] the dictatorial propagandists are doing is to try to bypass the rational side of men and to appeal directly to these unconscious forces below the surface so that you are in a way making nonsense of the whole democratic procedure, which is based on conscious choice or on rational ground …

Children are quite clearly much more suggestible than the average grownup and, again, suppose that for one reason or another all the propaganda was in the hands of one or very few agencies, you would have an extraordinarily powerful force playing on these children who are going to grow up and be adults …

You can read in the trade journal the most critical accounts of how necessary it is to get hold of the children, because then they will be loyal brand buyers later on. Translate this into political terms, the dictator says they will be loyal ideology buyers when they’re grown up.”

Huxley argues that in order to create the dystopian future presented in his book, you have to centralize wealth, power and control. Hence, the way to protect against it is to insist on decentralization. It’s surprising that even 60 years ago Huxley was wise enough to understand this profoundly important principle.

I believe that it is the decentralization of the internet that is required to prevent censorship and manipulation in the future. This means that websites and platforms are not stored in one central place that can easily be controlled and manipulated but, rather, widely distributed to thousands, if not millions, of computers all over the world. It would work because if there is no central storage it can’t be removed.

Decentralized platforms allow the majority of power to reside with the individual. Technologies that can be easily misused to control the public narrative must also remain largely decentralized, so that no one person or agency ends up with too much power to manipulate and influence the public. Our modern-day social media monopolies are a perfect example of what Huxley warned us about.

The same goes for economic institutions too. Today, we can see how the role of the central bank (in the U.S. known as the Federal Reserve) — a privately-owned entity with the power to break entire countries apart for profit — is forcing us toward a new global economic system that will impoverish and quite literally enslave everyone, with the exception of the technocratic social bankers themselves and their globalist allies.

Our Orwellian Present

A contemporary and student of Huxley was George Orwell (real name Eric Blair1), who wrote another dystopian classic — “1984” — published in 1949. The two books — “1984” and “Brave New World” — share the commonality that they both depict a future devoid of the very things that we associate with having a healthy, free, creative, purposeful and enjoyable life.

In “1984,” the context is a society where an all-knowing, all-seeing “Big Brother” rules with an iron fist. Citizens are under constant watch. Privacy is nonexistent, and language is twisted to justify and glorify oppression.

Some of the spectacles of 2020 could have easily been ripped straight out of the pages of “1984,” as riots were described by cheery news anchors as “mostly peaceful protests,” even as city blocks were engulfed in flames behind them and people were bleeding to death in the streets. For those familiar with the book, such scenes were difficult to watch without being reminded of 1984s “double-think.”

Orwell Versus Huxley

There are differences between the two works, however. While Orwell foresees people being forcefully enslaved by an external agency, and kept in that state by the same, Huxley’s vision is one in which people have been so thoroughly conditioned that they come to love their servitude. At that point, no external authoritarian ruler is actually required.

If you think about it, I’m sure you will agree that this is clearly the most efficient strategy to take control of the population. Moore’s law and the exponential improvement in computer processing capacity has exponentially accelerated the global elites’ ability to precisely identify how to implement peaceful control that will have the majority virtually begging for tyranny.

In Huxley’s “Brave New World,” people have fallen in love with the very technologies that prevent them from thinking and acting of their free will, so the enslaved maintain their own control structure.

As noted by Neil Postman in his book, “Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business,” in which he compares and contrasts the futures presented by Huxley and Orwell:

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism.

Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy.

As Huxley remarked in ‘Brave New World Revisited,’ the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny ‘failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.’

In ‘1984,’ Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In ‘Brave New World,’ they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.”

One can argue about who predicted the future best, Orwell or Huxley, but in the final analysis, I think we’re looking at a mixture of both, although it seems obvious to me that Huxley was more prescient and he was actually Orwell’s mentor. Huxley’s concerns are far more serious as the programming is essentially silent, and it is patently evident that the technocrats have been highly successful in implementing this strategy in the past year.2

That said, we’re facing both the threat of externally imposed authoritarianism and control predicted by Orwell, and the subversive, subliminal programming through mindless entertainment and the lure of convenience proposed by Huxley.

Undoubtedly, the combination is a powerful one, and likely far more effective than either control strategy by itself. I’ve already touched on how Orwell’s work is playing out in the real world through the “double-think” mental gymnastics we get from the controlled, tightly centralized mainstream media these days.

For an example of how Huxley’s ideas have influenced the technocracy’s planning, look no further than the globalists’ call to “build back better” (video above) and the World Economic Forum’s 2030 agenda (below), which includes the strangely ominous dictum that you will own nothing and be happy.

The unstated implication is that the world’s resources will be owned and controlled by the technocratic elite, and you’ll have to pay for the temporary use of absolutely everything. Nothing will actually belong to you. All items and resources are to be used by the collective, while actual ownership is restricted to an upper stratum of social class.

Just how will this imposed serfdom make you happy? Again, the unstated implication is that lack of ownership is a marvelous convenience. Rent a pot and then return it. You don’t need storage space! Imagine the freedom! They even promise the convenience of automatic drone delivery straight to your door.

Artificial intelligence — which is siphoning your data about every aspect of your existence through nearly every piece of technology and appliance you own — will run your life, predicting your every mood and desire, catering to your every whim. Ah, the luxury of not having to make any decisions!

This is the mindset they’re trying to program into you, and for most, it appears to be working. For others who can see the propaganda for what it is, these promises look and feel like proverbial mouse traps. Once you bite the cheese, you’ll be stuck, robbed of your freedom forevermore. And, as Huxley told Wallace, individual freedom is really a prerequisite for a genuinely productive society:

“Life of man is ultimately impossible without a considerable measure of individual freedom. Initiative and creativity — all these things that we value, and I think value properly, are impossible without a large measure of freedom.”

When Wallace challenges Huxley on this by pointing out that the Soviet Union was successfully developing both militarily and artistically, despite being a tightly controlled regime, Huxley counters by saying that those doing that creative work, especially scientists, were also granted far greater personal freedom and prosperity than everyone else.

As long as they kept their noses out of politics, they were brought into the upper echelon and given a great deal of freedom, and without this freedom, they would not have been able to be as creative and inventive, Huxley says.

The Threat of the New Normal

This anti-human “new normal” that world leaders are now urging us to accept and embrace is the trap of all traps. Unless your most cherished dream is to lie in bed for the rest of your life, your body atrophying away, with a pair of VR goggles permanently strapped to your face, you must resist and oppose the “new normal” every day going forward.

As noted by Spiked editor Brendan O’Neill in his February 5, 2021, article,3 while the first lockdown was marked by a sense of camaraderie and the promise of it being a temporary measure that we can get through if we just address the problem together, by the third round, all forms of social connection have vanished, as has the anticipation of a return to normality.

“In the first lockdown, the dream of normality was what kept people going; it was actively encouraged by some politicians and even some in the doom-laden media. This time, dreams of normality are treated as ‘dysfunction’, as a species of ‘denial,’” O’Neill writes.

Make no mistake. The media’s rebuke of a return to normalcy as a nonsensical piped ream is dangerous propaganda territory. The reality is we could easily open everything back up and go back to business as usual, and nothing out of the ordinary, in terms of sickness and death, would occur.

People die every year. It’s an inevitable reality of life and, up until the last two weeks of 2020, there actually were no greater number of deaths recorded than the year prior, and the year prior to that, and the one before that.4

While new numbers released by the CDC indicate that 2020’s final two weeks may have pushed the total deaths beyond 2019’s (final data won’t be available for months),5 COVID-19 simply isn’t as lethal as initially suspected. It primarily kills the elderly and the chronically ill — what’s most interesting is that suicide deaths among teens went up dramatically as lockdowns and school closings dragged on.6,7

What’s more, we now have effective prophylactics and treatments that ensure the loss of life due to COVID-19 can be radically minimized. Yet, our leaders don’t want you to think in those terms. They want you to remain fearful because they have a deep appreciation of the value of fear in catalyzing the precise type of capitulation and surrender they need in order to implement the Great Reset.

Tragically, many citizens have so embraced the fear culture, they don’t even need an authoritarian figure to tell them to comply with rules that have no medical benefit anymore. They’ll happily act as the designated COVID police, making sure everyone around them complies.

Hell hath no fury like one caught in the unsound belief that they will die if you don’t wear a mask. This is no way to live. It’s not sane and it’s not healthy, and the prophetic works of Huxley and Orwell illustrate where it will all end if we don’t push back. (Brave New World.)

Dr. Joseph Mercola is a superb researcher and provides excellent medical advice. However, he does not realize that the forces we are fighting are preternatural, not merely natural, and that we need to pray to Our Lady through her Most Holy Rosary for a restoration of the Catholic City as Pope Saint Pius X exhorted us over one hundred ten years ago:

But, on the contrary, by ignoring the laws governing human nature and by breaking the bounds within which they operate, the human person is lead, not toward progress, but towards death. This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

“Democracy” and “freedom” are not our goals.

Our goal must be first to seek the Kingdom of God as children of His Holy Catholic Church and to be ready at all times for our Particular Judgment by begging Our Lady to send us the graces won for us by her Divine Son during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross and to remember not to be distracted by the side shows of naturalism. The forces working against truth in the world are the same as those who conspire against our salvation at every point of our lives:

Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high place. Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace:

In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one. And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God). By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints. (Ephesians 6: 11-18.)

We need a return to Christ the King and His true Church, she who is the only means of human salvation and also the foundation—but, given fallen human nature, never an absolute guarantor—of a just social order within nations and peace among them.

Our true popes have taught us that this is so:

Nor can We predict happier times for religion and government from the plans of those who desire vehemently to separate the Church from the state, and to break the mutual concord between temporal authority and the priesthood. It is certain that that concord which always was favorable and beneficial for the sacred and the civil order is feared by the shameless lovers of liberty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

But, although we have not omitted often to proscribe and reprobate the chief errors of this kind, yet the cause of the Catholic Church, and the salvation of souls entrusted to us by God, and the welfare of human society itself, altogether demand that we again stir up your pastoral solicitude to exterminate other evil opinions, which spring forth from the said errors as from a fountain. Which false and perverse opinions are on that ground the more to be detested, because they chiefly tend to this, that that salutary influence be impeded and (even) removed, which the Catholic Church, according to the institution and command of her Divine Author, should freely exercise even to the end of the world -- not only over private individuals, but over nations, peoples, and their sovereign princes; and (tend also) to take away that mutual fellowship and concord of counsels between Church and State which has ever proved itself propitious and salutary, both for religious and civil interests.

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling." (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

As a consequence, the State, constituted as it is, is clearly bound to act up to the manifold and weighty duties linking it to God, by the public profession of religion. Nature and reason, which command every individual devoutly to worship God in holiness, because we belong to Him and must return to Him, since from Him we came, bind also the civil community by a like law. For, men living together in society are under the power of God no less than individuals are, and society, no less than individuals, owes gratitude to God who gave it being and maintains it and whose everbounteous goodness enriches it with countless blessings. Since, then, no one is allowed to be remiss in the service due to God, and since the chief duty of all men is to cling to religion in both its teaching and practice-not such religion as they may have a preference for, but the religion which God enjoins, and which certain and most clear marks show to be the only one true religion -- it is a public crime to act as though there were no God. So, too, is it a sin for the State not to have care for religion as a something beyond its scope, or as of no practical benefit; or out of many forms of religion to adopt that one which chimes in with the fancy; for we are bound absolutely to worship God in that way which He has shown to be His will. All who rule, therefore, would hold in honor the holy name of God, and one of their chief duties must be to favor religion, to protect it, to shield it under the credit and sanction of the laws, and neither to organize nor enact any measure that may compromise its safety. This is the bounden duty of rulers to the people over whom they rule. For one and all are we destined by our birth and adoption to enjoy, when this frail and fleeting life is ended, a supreme and final good in heaven, and to the attainment of this every endeavor should be directed. Since, then, upon this depends the full and perfect happiness of mankind, the securing of this end should be of all imaginable interests the most urgent. Hence, civil society, established for the common welfare, should not only safeguard the wellbeing of the community, but have also at heart the interests of its individual members, in such mode as not in any way to hinder, but in every manner to render as easy as may be, the possession of that highest and unchangeable good for which all should seek. Wherefore, for this purpose, care must especially be taken to preserve unharmed and unimpeded the religion whereof the practice is the link connecting man with God.

Now, it cannot be difficult to find out which is the true religion, if only it be sought with an earnest and unbiased mind; for proofs are abundant and striking. We have, for example, the fulfillment of prophecies, miracles in great numbers, the rapid spread of the faith in the midst of enemies and in face of overwhelming obstacles, the witness of the martyrs, and the like. From all these it is evident that the only true religion is the one established by Jesus Christ Himself, and which He committed to His Church to protect and to propagate. . . . To exclude the Church, founded by God Himself, from the business of life, from the making of laws, from the education of youth, from domestic society is a grave and fatal error(Pope Leo XII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)

There are others, somewhat more moderate though not more consistent, who affirm that the morality of individuals is to be guided by the divine law, but not the morality of the State, for that in public affairs the commands of God may be passed over, and may be entirely disregarded in the framing of laws. Hence follows the fatal theory of the need of separation between Church and State. But the absurdity of such a position is manifest. Nature herself proclaims the necessity of the State providing means and opportunities whereby the community may be enabled to live properly, that is to say, according to the laws of God. For, since God is the source of all goodness and justice, it is absolutely ridiculous that the State should pay no attention to these laws or render them abortive by contrary enactments. Besides, those who are in authority owe it to the commonwealth not only to provide for its external well-being and the conveniences of life, but still more to consult the welfare of men's souls in the wisdom of their legislation. But, for the increase of such benefits, nothing more suitable can be conceived than the laws which have God for their author; and, therefore, they who in their government of the State take no account of these laws abuse political power by causing it to deviate from its proper end and from what nature itself prescribes. And, what is still more important, and what We have more than once pointed out, although the civil authority has not the same proximate end as the spiritual, nor proceeds on the same lines, nevertheless in the exercise of their separate powers they must occasionally meet. For their subjects are the same, and not infrequently they deal with the same objects, though in different ways. Whenever this occurs, since a state of conflict is absurd and manifestly repugnant to the most wise ordinance of God, there must necessarily exist some order or mode of procedure to remove the occasions of difference and contention, and to secure harmony in all things. This harmony has been not inaptly compared to that which exists between the body and the soul for the well-being of both one and the other, the separation of which brings irremediable harm to the body, since it extinguishes its very life  (Pope Leo XIII, Libertas, June 20, 1888.)

As with individuals, so with nations. These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree, and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded, both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow nor end to aim at. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely wise, good, and just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men.  It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the states and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption.  It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, it makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which It has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel It does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes  It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty.  Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. "Between them," he says, "there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-"Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur." He proceeds: "Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them.... As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. -- "Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere.... Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error." (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)

But it is not only within her own household that the Church must come to terms. Besides her relations with those within, she has others with those who are outside. The Church does not occupy the world all by herself; there are other societies in the world., with which she must necessarily have dealings and contact. The rights and duties of the Church towards civil societies must, therefore, be determined, and determined, of course, by her own nature, that, to wit, which the Modernists have already described to us. The rules to be applied in this matter are clearly those which have been laid down for science and faith, though in the latter case the question turned upon the object, while in the present case we have one of ends. In the same way, then, as faith and science are alien to each other by reason of the diversity of their objects, Church and State are strangers by reason of the diversity of their ends, that of the Church being spiritual while that of the State is temporal. Formerly it was possible to subordinate the temporal to the spiritual and to speak of some questions as mixed, conceding to the Church the position of queen and mistress in all such, because the Church was then regarded as having been instituted immediately by God as the author of the supernatural order. But this doctrine is today repudiated alike by philosophers and historians. The state must, therefore, be separated from the Church, and the Catholic from the citizen. Every Catholic, from the fact that he is also a citizen, has the right and the duty to work for the common good in the way he thinks best, without troubling himself about the authority of the Church, without paying any heed to its wishes, its counsels, its orders -- nay, even in spite of its rebukes. For the Church to trace out and prescribe for the citizen any line of action, on any pretext whatsoever, is to be guilty of an abuse of authority, against which one is bound to protest with all one's might. Venerable Brethren, the principles from which these doctrines spring have been solemnly condemned by Our predecessor, Pius VI, in his Apostolic Constitution Auctorem fidei  (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Let the Princes and Rulers of peoples remember this truth, and let them consider whether it is a prudent and safe idea for governments or for states to separate themselves from the holy religion of Jesus Christ, from which their authority receives such strength and support. Let them consider again and again, whether it is a measure of political wisdom to seek to divorce the teaching of the Gospel and of the Church from the ruling of a country and from the public education of the young. Sad experience proves that human authority fails where religion is set aside. The fate of our first parent after the Fall is wont to come also upon nations. As in his case, no sooner had his will turned from God than his unchained passions rejected the sway of the will; so, too, when the rulers of nations despise divine authority, in their turn the people are wont to despise their human authority. There remains, of course, the expedient of using force to repress popular risings; but what is the result? Force can repress the body, but it cannot repress the souls of men. (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914.)

When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another's word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.

There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

Every true and lasting reform has ultimately sprung from the sanctity of men who were driven by the love of God and of men. Generous, ready to stand to attention to any call from God, yet confident in themselves because confident in their vocation, they grew to the size of beacons and reformers. On the other hand, any reformatory zeal, which instead of springing from personal purity, flashes out of passion, has produced unrest instead of light, destruction instead of construction, and more than once set up evils worse than those it was out to remedy. No doubt "the Spirit breatheth where he will" (John iii. 8): "of stones He is able to raise men to prepare the way to his designs" (Matt. iii. 9). He chooses the instruments of His will according to His own plans, not those of men. But the Founder of the Church, who breathed her into existence at Pentecost, cannot disown the foundations as He laid them. Whoever is moved by the spirit of God, spontaneously adopts both outwardly and inwardly, the true attitude toward the Church, this sacred fruit from the tree of the cross, this gift from the Spirit of God, bestowed on Pentecost day to an erratic world.

In your country, Venerable Brethren, voices are swelling into a chorus urging people to leave the Church, and among the leaders there is more than one whose official position is intended to create the impression that this infidelity to Christ the King constitutes a signal and meritorious act of loyalty to the modern State. Secret and open measures of intimidation, the threat of economic and civic disabilities, bear on the loyalty of certain classes of Catholic functionaries, a pressure which violates every human right and dignity. Our wholehearted paternal sympathy goes out to those who must pay so dearly for their loyalty to Christ and the Church; but directly the highest interests are at stake, with the alternative of spiritual loss, there is but one alternative left, that of heroism. If the oppressor offers one the Judas bargain of apostasy he can only, at the cost of every worldly sacrifice, answer with Our Lord: "Begone, Satan! For it is written: The Lord thy God shalt thou adore, and Him only shalt thou serve" (Matt. iv. 10). And turning to the Church, he shall say: "Thou, my mother since my infancy, the solace of my life and advocate at my death, may my tongue cleave to my palate if, yielding to worldly promises or threats, I betray the vows of my baptism." As to those who imagine that they can reconcile exterior infidelity to one and the same Church, let them hear Our Lord's warning: -- "He that shall deny me before men shall be denied before the angels of God" (Luke xii. 9). (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)

While it is important to face the reality of our situation with consummate sobriety, we do not surrender to agitation and to fear. We must remain strong in our Holy Faith, knowing that the final victory belongs to Immaculate Heart of Mary when a true pope is restored to the Throne of Saint Peter, something will happen and, according to the mystic Elizabeth Cannori Mora, when Saint Peter, whose feast we celebrate today, Monday, February 22, 2001, the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Antioch, will point to the bishop who is to sit thereon.

The following narrative is found at a sedeplenist website, but readers can examine the prophecies in their unnarrated form by reading The Life of the Venerable Elizabeth Canori Mora online:

On Christmas Day, 1813, Elizabeth was transported to a place bathed in light. There, numerous saints surrounded a humble manger, from which the Holy Child beckoned her.

I saw my beloved newborn Jesus bathed in his own blood. At that moment, I understood why the blood of the newborn Divine Infant had been spilled - the bad conduct of many priests and religious who did not behave according to their state, the poor education given children by their fathers and mothers.3The angels conducted Elizabeth to secret lairs where clerics conspired to topple thrones and destroy the remnants of Christian civilization.

I saw many ministers of the Lord who renounced one another, furiously ripping from their person the sacred vestments. I say the holy altars torn down by the very ministers of God. 4I saw the Sanhedrin of wolves that surrounded the Pope and two angels weeping. A holy boldness inspired me to ask the reason for their sad lamentations. Contemplating the city of Rome with compassionate eyes, they replied, "Miserable city, ungrateful people, the justice of God will chastise you."5

"The entire world was in chaos."

The angels showed Elizabeth the destruction that God has in store for a world that refuses to heed his words.

Thunderbolts of divine justice flamed about me. Buildings fell into ruin. Cities, provinces and countries - the entire world was in chaos. One heard nothing save voices weakly begging for mercy. The number of dead was incalculable.6

What most impressed Elizabeth was the sight of God as a giant.

His omnipotent hands were filled with bolts of lightning. His face was resplendent with indignation. His gaze alone was enough to incinerate the world. Neither angels nor saints accompanied Him - only His indignation.7

Of this vision, Elizabeth wrote, "Had it lasted more than a moment, I surely would have died."8

His gaze alone was enough to incinerate the world. "The Mother of God did not implore God for mercy."On June 13, 1917, Our Lady showed Lucia, Francisco, and Jacinta her Immaculate Heart, surrounded by thorns, symbols of the wounds inflicted by our sins. Elizabeth was also shown how grievously our sins offend the Blessed Virgin. Seeing the sorrow in Our Lady's eyes, she asked her why she grieved."Contemplate, O daughter," Our Lady replied, "Contemplate the great impiety."

Hearing these words, I saw brazen apostates boldly seeking to wrench her Holy Son from her most pure bosom. In face of this outrage, the Mother of God did not implore God for mercy, but instead called for justice. Robed in inexorable justice, the Eternal Father turned his indignant gaze toward the world. At that moment, nature convulsed and the world lost its bearings as it sank beneath a misery beyond imagination.9

"Woe to those who embrace the condemnable philosophies of our day."

On July 6, 1815, God again revealed to Elizabeth the chastisement brought down on mankind by "rapacious wolves in sheep's clothing, bitter persecutors of Jesus Crucified and his bride, the Church." The whole world was in convulsion, especially the city of Rome. At the Sacred College, some had been dispersed, others humiliated and still others ruthlessly assassinated. The clergy and nobility suffered similar fates.10

On June 28, 1820, the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, Elizabeth beheld the Prince of the Apostles descending from Heaven in pontifical vestments and escorted by a legion of angels. With his crosier, St. Peter drew an immense cross upon the Earth; on each of its ends verdant trees appeared enveloped in brilliant light. Here the godly - religious and lay alike - found refuge from the torment.

Yet woe to those religious who scorned the holy rules, because all will perish under the terrible scourge. This applies to all who embrace licentiousness and the condemnable philosophies of our day.11"With a wave of his right hand, He will punish them."Elizabeth continued her account of her fearsome vision:

The firmament was covered with a tenebrous blue, a terrifying sight. The wind's impetuous breath was felt everywhere as its violent roar - like that of a ferocious lion - echoed across the globe.

Terror will reduce men and beasts to utter fear, and they will kill one another without pity. The avenging hand of the omnipotent God weigh down on these miserable souls, and He will chastise their shameless pride and impudent temerity.

With a wave of his hand, He will punish them, setting loose from Hell legions of demons to scourge the world, executing the demands of Divine Justice.

Because they surrendered their souls to Satan and allied themselves with him to strike against the Holy Catholic Church, God will permit these iniquitous men to be chastised by ferocious demons who will devastate every place where man has affronted and profaned Him.12

"I will reform my people and my Church."*

Thanks be to God, the similarity of these supernatural manifestations a century apart does not end with their depiction of the catastrophic chastisement awaiting those who mock God and his laws. Like the consoling promise of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary given us at Fatima, the message of Blessed Elizabeth offers the faithful cause for hope.

After the purification described above had been accomplished, Elizabeth saw Saint Peter descending from Heaven on a majestic pontifical throne. He was followed by Saint Paul, who: "traversed the world to imprison those malignant infernal spirits and bring them before the holy Apostle Saint Peter who, with authority, confined them to the dark netherworld from which they had been released. Then a beautiful radiance shone above the Earth, announcing the reconciliation of God and man"13 and the remnant of faithful Catholics were led from their place of refuge to the throne of Saint Peter.

The Saint chose the new Pope, and the Church was reformed to the precepts of the Gospel. The religious orders were reestablished, and every Christian home was permeated with such zeal for the glory of God that all acclaimed the triumph and honor of the Holy Catholic Church.14

Thus Our Lord would fulfill what He had confided to Elizabeth in 1821:

I will reform my people and my Church. I will send zealous priests to preach the Faith. I will form a new apostolate. I will send the Holy Ghost to renew the earth. I will reform the religious orders with holy men and women who possess the spirit of my beloved son Ignatius. I will give a new Pastor to my Church who, with holy zeal, will reform the flock of Christ.15 (As found at: The Coming Chastisement.)

We must carry our daily crosses with joy in these times, knowing that we are living in very similar circumstances that faced Catholics who were persecuted by the Roman emperors and their minions between 67 A.D. and 313 A.D., albeit noting intermittent periods of peace before a new period of persecution would ensue.

We must carry our daily crosses with confidence as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary as we continue to pray, especially during this holy season of Lent, as many Rosaries as our state-in-life permits, making reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world as we remember that sin is more dangerous than any virus, including the Wuhan/China/Chinese/Covid-19/Coronavirus.

On the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Antioch

As noted just above, today is the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Antioch and the Commemorations of Monday in the First Week of Lent and of Saint Paul.

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B. explained the origin and significance of this feast, which is secondary to the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome but is nevertheless instructive because it teaches us that even in his first see, Antioch, Syria, Saint Peter was seen by all Christians as the visible head of Holy Mother Church here on earth:

We are called upon, a second time, to honor St. Peter’s Chair: first, it was his Pontificate in Rome; today it is his Episcopate at Antioch. The seven years spent by the Prince of the Apostles in the second of these cities were the grandest glory she ever had; and they are too important a portion of the life of St. Peter to be passed by without being noticed in the Christian Cycle.

Three years had elapsed since our Lord’s Ascension. The Church had already been made fruitful by martyrdom, and from Jerusalem she had spread into distant countries. Antioch, the first of the cities of Asia, had received the Gospel; and it was there that they who professed the faith of Jesus were first called “Christians.” Jerusalem was doomed to destruction for her having not only refused to acknowledge, but also for her having crucified, the Messias: it was time for Peter, in whom resided the supreme power, to deprive the faithless City of the honor she had heretofore enjoyed, of possessing within her walls the Chair of the Apostolate. It was towards the Gentiles that the Holy Spirit drove those Clouds, which were shown to Isaias as the symbol of the holy Apostles. Accordingly, it was in Antioch, the third Capital of the Roman Empire, that Peter first places the august Throne on which, as Vice-regent of Christ, he presides over the Church—that new family of which all Nations are invited to become members.

But the progress of the Apostles was so rapid; the conquests they made, in spite of every opposition, were so extensive—that the Vicar of Christ was inspired to leave Antioch, after he had honored it with the Chair during the space of seven years. Alexandria, the second City of the Empire, is also to be made a See of Peter; and Rome, the Capital of the world, awaits the grand privilege for which God had long been preparing her. Onwards, then, does the Prince advance, bearing with him the destinies of the Church; where he fixes his last abode, and where he dies, there will he have his Successor in sublime dignity of Vicar of Christ. He leaves Antioch, making one of his disciples, Evodius, its Bishop. Evodius succeeds Peter as Bishop of Antioch; but that See is not to inherit the Headship of the Church, which goes whithersoever Peter goes. He sends Mark, another of his disciples, to take possession, in his name, of Alexandria; and this Church he would have be the second in the world, and though he has not ruled it in person, he raises it above that of Antioch. This done, he goes to Rome, where he permanently establishes that Chair on which he will live, and teach, and rule, in his Successors, to the end of time.

And here we have the origin of the three great Patriarchal Sees, which were the object of so much veneration in the early ages—the first is Rome, which is invested with all the prerogatives of the Prince of the Apostles, which, when dying, he transmitted to her; the second is Alexandria, which owes her pre-eminence to Peter’s adopting her as his second See; the third is Antioch, whither he repaired in person, when he left Jerusalem to bring to the Gentiles the grace of adoption. If, therefore, Antioch is below Alexandria in rank, Alexandria never enjoyed the honor granted to Antioch, of having been governed in person by him whom Christ appointed to be the supreme Pastor of his Church. Nothing, then, could be more just than that Antioch should be honored, in that she has had the privilege of having been, for seven years, the center of Christendom; and this is the object of today’s Feast.

Yes, the Episcopate is most sacred, for it comes from the hands of Jesus Christ through Peter and his successors. Such is the unanimous teaching of Catholic Tradition, which is in keeping with the language used by the Roman Pontiffs from the earliest Ages, who have always spoken of the dignity of Bishops as consisting in their being “called to a share of their own solicitude.” Hence St. Cyprian does not hesitate to say that “our Savior, wishing to establish the Episcopal dignity and constitute his Church, says to Peter: To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven; and here we have both the institution of Bishops and the constitution of the Church.” This same doctrine is clearly stated in a letter written to Pope St. Symmachus by St. Cæsarius of Arles , who lived in the fifth century: “The Episcopate flows from the blessed Apostle Peter; and consequently, it belongs to Your Holiness to prescribe to the several Churches the rules which they are to follow.” This fundamental principle, which St. Leo the Great has so ably and eloquently developed (as we have seen on the Feast of the Chair at Rome, January 18th)—this principle, which is taught us by universal Tradition, is laid down with all possible precision in the magnificent Letters, still extant, of Pope St. Innocent the First, who preceded St. Leo by several years. Thus, he writes to the Council of Carthage, “that the Episcopate, with all its authority, emanates from the Apostolic See;” to the Council of Milevum, “that Bishops must look upon Peter as the source whence both their name and their dignity are derived;” to St. Victricius, Bishop of Rouen, “that the Apostolate and the Episcopate both owe their origin to Peter.”

Controversy is not our object. All we aim at by giving these quotations from the Fathers on the prerogatives of Peter’s Chair, is to excite the Faithful to be devoted to it and venerate it. This we have endeavored to do by showing them that this Chair is the source of the spiritual authority which, in its several degrees, rules and sanctifies them. Yes, all spiritual authority comes from Peter; all comes from the Bishop of Rome, in whom Peter will continue to govern the Church to the end of time. Jesus Christ is the founder of the Episcopate; it is the Holy Ghost who establishes Bishops to rule the Church—but the mission, the institution, which assigns the Pastor his Flock, and the Flock its Pastor, these are given by Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost through the ministry of Peter and his Successors.

How sacred, how divine, is this authority of the Keys, which is first given by heaven itself to the Roman Pontiff; then is delegated by him to the Prelates of the Church; and thus guides and blesses the whole Christian world! The Apostolic See has varied its mode of transmitting such an authority according to the circumstances of the several Ages; but the one source of the whole Power was always the same—the Chair of Peter. We have already see how, at the commencement, there were three Chairs: Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch; and all three were sources of the canonical institution of the Bishops of their respective provinces; but they were all three Chairs of Peter, for they were founded by him that they might preside over their Patriarchates, as St. Leo, St. Gelasius, and St. Gregory the Great expressly teach. But of these three Chairs, the Pontiff of Rome had his authority and his institution from heaven, whereas the two other Patriarchs could not exercise their rights until they were recognized and confirmed by him who was Peter’s successor as Vicar of Christ. Later on, two other Sees were added to these first three: but it was only by the consent of the Roman Pontiff that Constantinople and Jerusalem obtained such an honor. Let us notice too the difference there is between the accidental honors conferred on four of these Churches, and the divine prerogative of the Church of Rome. By God’s permission, the Sees of Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, and Jerusalem, were defiled by heresy; they became Chairs of pestilence; and having corrupted the faith they received from Rome, they could not transmit to others the mission they themselves had forfeited. Sad indeed was the ruin of such pillars as these! Peter’s hand had placed them in the Church. They had merited the love and veneration of men, but they fell; and their fall gave one more proof of the solidity of that edifice which Christ himself had built on Peter. The unity of the Church was made more visible. Obliged by the treachery of her own favored children to deprive them of the privileges they had received from her, Rome was, more evidently than ever, the sole source of pastoral Power.

We, then, both priests and people, have a right to know whence our Pastors have received their Power. From whose hand have they received the Keys? If their mission come from the Apostolic See, let us honor and obey them, for they are sent to us by Jesus Christ, who has invested them, through Peter, with his own authority. If they claim our obedience without having been sent by the Bishop of Rome, we must refuse to receive them, for they are not acknowledged by Christ as his Ministers. The holy anointing may have conferred on them the sacred character of the Episcopate—it matters not; they must be as aliens to us, for they have not been sent—they are not Pastors.

Thus it is that the Divine Founder of the Church, who willed that she should be a City seated on a mountain, gave her Visibility; it was an essential requisite; for since all were called to enter her pale, all must be able to see her. But he was not satisfied with this. He moreover willed that the spiritual power exercised by her Pastors should come from a visible source; so that the Faithful might have a sure means of verifying the claims of those who were to guide them in His name. Our Lord, we say it reverently, owed this to us; for on the Last Day, he will not receive us as his Children unless we shall have been members of his Church and have lived in union with him by the ministry of Pastors lawfully constituted. Honor, then, and submission to Jesus in his Vicar! honor and submission to the Vicar of Christ in the Pastors he sends!  (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B. The Liturgical Year, Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Antioch.)

The Catholic Church is the shining city set on a mountain, not the United States of America. It is important to remember this whenever one hears a recording or sees a video of any politician, including the late President Ronald Wilson Reagan or former President Donald John Trump, as Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s favor rests upon Catholicism, not upon Americanism.

Additionally, Dom Prosper Gueranger’s defense of the submission and honor that Catholics must pay to the man they recognize as the Vicar of Christ on earth is a reminder that those in the resist-while-recognize movement continue to persist in the heresy of Gallicanism that has done even more harm to Catholics’ understanding of the true teaching about Papal Infallibility than all the efforts to undermine it by the conciliar “popes” and their apparatchiks. (See Novus Ordo Watch for a discussion of Dom Prosper’s book, Papal Monarchy, that was commended by none other than the heroic foe of Gallicanism and the Kulturkampf in Germany under Otto von Bismarck, Pope Pius IX.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s prayer to Saint Peter reminds us that the Faith of Saint Peter will never fail, which is yet another proof that the counterfeit church of conciliarism and its falsehoods is not and can never be the Catholic Church:

Glory be to thee, O Prince of the Apostles, on thy Chair at Antioch, where thou didst for seven years preside over the universal Church! How magnificent are the stations of thy Apostolate!—Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria (by the disciple Mark), and Rome—these are the Cities which have been honored by thy august Chair. After Rome, Antioch was the longest graced by its presence: justly, therefore, do we honor this Church, which was thus made by thee the Mother and Mistress of all other Churches. Alas! all her beauty has now left her; her faith is dead; she is in bondage to the Saracen. Save her, take her once more under thy power, bring her into allegiance to Rome, where thou hadst thy Chair, not for seven years only, but for all ages. The gates of hell have let loose the fury of every tempest upon thee, firm Rock of the Church! and we ourselves have seen the immortal Chair banished for a time from Rome. The words of St. Ambrose then came to our minds: “Where Peter is, there is the Church.” How could we despair? Did we not know that it was God’s inspiration which made thee choose Rome for the fixed resting place of thy Throne? No human will can put asunder what God has united; the Bishop of Rome must ever be the Vicar of Christ; and the Vicar of Christ, let sacrilege and persecution banish him as they will, must ever be the Bishop of Rome. Holy Apostle! calm the wildness of the tempest, lest the weak should take scandal. Beseech our Lord that he permit not the residence of thy Successor to be disturbed in that Holy City, which has been chosen for so great an honor. If it be that her inhabitants deserve punishment for their offenses, spare them for the sake of their brethren of the rest of the world; and pray for them, that their Faith may once more become what it was when St. Paul praised it, and said to them: Your Faith is spoken of in the whole world. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B, The Liturgical Year.)

Although we know that we have not had a true pope on the Throne of Saint Peter since the death of Pope Pius XII on October 9, 1958, the Feast of Saint John Leonard and the Commemorations of Saints Dionysius, Rusticus, and Eleutherius, a true pope will be restored in God’s good time, not our time, and that we must simply pray, fast and make sacrifices for the day when Faith of Saint Peter will once again be the Faith of the whole world, and may we never fail to cling with tenderness to Our Lady, who prayed for Saint Peter’s release from chains once and is ever doing so now.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!   

Vivat Christus RexViva Cristo Rey!

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us. 

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Peter Damian, pray for us.