Matt Taibbi discusses the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of labeling every political opponent a “Russian asset”

Philip Giraldi is rightly disgusted by the endless smears of Tulsi by the warmongering Parasite Class

Jim Bovard wonders why, if members of Congress want to occupy Syria so badly, won’t they vote to declare war?

A short history of the FBI’s persecution of political dissent

Reason’s Jacob Sullum explains why banning “assault weapons” is just another gun-grabbing gimmick

Most people are pro-vaccine by default. We’ve been fed a constant diet of industry-created propaganda our entire lives, dutifully lining up for our shots. It’s not until someone experiences first-hand the harm that a vaccine is capable of that they begin to rid themselves of the notion that vaccines are safe and effective for everyone. It usually comes as a total shock to learn that the federal vaccine injury compensation program has paid out over $4 billion over the past thirty years for vaccine injuries and deaths. It also comes as a shock to learn that vaccine manufacturers enjoy complete legal immunity, meaning that they can’t be sued in the event that someone either suffers an injury or dies from their vaccine.

These are facts that contemptible parasites such as Merck CEO Kenneth Frazier would prefer to remain hidden from as many people as possible. In his televised appearance today, he lamented the rapid spread of these inconvenient facts, which to him appear as “misinformation”. The internet, he believes, requires curation, code for censorship. This is to prevent establishment narratives from falling apart so quickly, as tends to be the case when information is free, easily accessed, and easily spread. Too many people are picking apart the narratives peddled by the Political Class, their schemes derailing before they can get their payoff. I’m sure it’s extremely irritating, that fleecing the public is getting harder now that the public can figure out the scams more quickly.

But I’m not even sure why anyone is taking him seriously, as he has a financial stake in the masses accepting their vaccines in a compliant, unresisting manner. Why not curate him? He goes on to say that “anti-vaxxers” are a “threat to democracy”. Excuse me, but exercising our freedom of speech is only a threat to nothing more than your bottom line. And if your products require censorship and mandates in order to turn a profit, you’re peddling a bad product.

That question always makes me laugh, but it’s been posed to me more than once, and I try to make the person posing the question understand what they’re really saying when they speak about “belief” in a product created by a pharmaceutical corporation. Do I “believe” in a pharmaceutical product in the way a Catholic believes in the immaculate conception, or any member of a religion or cult “believes” in their particular doctrine? It’s dangerous to speak about a pharmaceutical product in terms of religious “belief”, as if vaccines are exempt from scrutiny and can only be discussed in theological terms. The vibe surrounding vaccine policy closely aligns with fundamentalist religion in many ways: a perception that “disbelievers” are damned, the censorship of critics, the inquisition and excommunication of heretics, the belief that society is doomed unless the majority accept vaccine policy into their hearts, et cetera.

We humans are hardwired for religion, and if we aren’t careful we let all sorts of beliefs fill that need. This includes vaccines, apparently. And it’s amazing what people will do when in the grips of religious fanaticism.