An apple a day keeps the doctor away. However, a vaccine a day keeps the doctor coming after you again and again in disarray.
With
the latest Covid-19 Delta Variant infections creating havoc in the US,
upending Americans' decadent lifestyle yet again, an official rollout of
3rd and 4th booster doses could begin within weeks.
"It's
likely that three doses of the vaccine are needed for full protection,"
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Chief US Health Adviser, said after probably
having been bribed heavily by the mRNA vaccines producers.
He
cited two Israeli-based studies that showed a decrease in infections
among people who got a third or fiurth booster shot. But he refused to
reveal the negative findings of the Pfizer vaccine by the same Israeli
studies on the Pfizer vaccine.
Misinformation and
disinformation are the key notes of this Panick-driven Vaccination
Campaign throughout the world. Governments and experts are together in
this business of creating fear upon the populace and then force the
gullible and daft people to be vaccinated but hypocritically telling
them that it's on a voluntary basis, so as to cover their own ass in
case the mRNA vaccines turned out to be dangerous instead of helpful.
Singapore
incorporated is also picking up the opportunity to go for a third
booster shot, starting with the immune deficiency people. Such an
opportunity to make more money must not go to waste.
More
infections and deaths have been deliberately allowed to happen so as to
help increase the sales and usage of the experimental mRNA vaccines.
Who stands to benefit from the increased usage of the Pfizer and Modena vaccines in Singapore?
Being a heavy investor in the two profit-driven and irresponsible companies, Temasek Holdings and GIC may be the winners?
Then who are the losers?
Think.
LIPS.
9/05/2021
More Big Money-Making Booster Shots From mRNA Vaccines Producers
On what basis did the Anglos Saxon tribe claimed North America, Australia, New Zealand, Falklands and the islands in the oceans?
Today the Anglo Saxon tribe is sitting on big chunks of land in Americas, Australasia and the oceans. While these thugs have the audacity to ask on what basis is China claiming the islands in the South China sea, we would also want to know what is the basis for the Anglo Saxon tribe to claim there lands. Is there any legal or legitimate basis for them to claim these lands as theirs?
The only so called basis they made their claims on when they set up to invade the world was the Doctrine of Christian Discovery, an edict from the Pope in Rome, some mighty super human or semi God. This Doctrine is based on the outrageous belief that the people of the rest of the world were sub humans and had no rights to own lands to call their own. And the Christian God had given the Christians the right to take the lands they occupied as theirs. Are these beliefs acceptable, legal, legitimate?
There was another very strong factor for the Anglo Saxon to make their claims stick. The came with guns and cannons to force the natives to give up their lands or be terminated. The natives of the world then were too primitive or less developed and less advanced in science and technology than the Anglo Saxon tribe and thus did not have the means to oppose the occupation, killings and seizure of their lands.
The occupation of the lands by the Anglo Saxon tribe was anything but illegal, by force and by a fake doctrine in the name of an imaginary God. A God that was white, a God that regarded the natives of the rest of the world as sub humans. In all counts, the Anglo Saxon tribe has no legal or legitimate rights to the lands they seized from the natives, occupied them and claimed them as their own. Period.
When would the natives of the stolen lands bring their cases to the International Court of Justice to reclaim their land? And at the same time bring charges for genocides and murders against the Anglo Saxon tribe?
Today we are also seeing many small countries claiming islands in the South China Sea that were claimed by China historically. The basis of their claims mainly fall on UNCLOS, a new legislation sanctioned by the UN in 1982. The question, is this piece of legislation good enough to claim the islands that were historically claimed by China? Can this piece of legislation be applied retrospectively against legitimate historical claims, to overturn claims of ownership by finder's keepers on land that were unoccupied?
Perhaps
the claimants of the South China Sea islands against China need to be
reminded of how the Anglo Saxon tribe claimed those lands they now
called theirs, eg USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Falklands, the
Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Ocean islands. They may not be able to use
the Doctrine of Christian Discovery as no one would accept this piece of
crap. But they might want to consider if they have bigger guns and
weapons than China like the Anglo Saxon tribe had against the natives of
the world in those early days to make their claims stick. China would
definitely not accept UNCLOS to be applied retrospectively against their
claims.
The bottom line is very simple, unless the Asean claimants have legitimate and legal basis, excluding the UNCLOS, please carry a bigger gun than China. The Anglo Saxon tribes are still sitting on their stolen lands simply because they still carry a bigger gun than the natives whose land they stole and no one, not even the UN would dare to utter a single word on this. They would sit on these stolen lands for as long as the natives are unable to fight back to reclaim their lands.
In contrast, the South China Sea islands were no man's land in the first place and no natives of any sort would have the legitimate right to claim the islands from China, not UNCLOS. It is easy to make wild and audacious claims, but one needs, other than a recognisable law, is the power of a big gun, like how the Anglo Saxon did it.
China is just being polite and courteous to entertain the Asean countries by its willingness to talk with them on the claims. China could simply ignore every one of them and none of them can do nothing about it, just like the white Americans, Canadian, Australians, New Zealanders and British are doing.
Anyone dare to ask them on what basis the Anglo Saxon tribe are claiming these stolen lands?9/04/2021
Covid19 - vaccine against discrimination or the mark of the beast?
It’s okay sometimes politics defies logic. Let’s move on. Get your vaccine against discrimination if need be.
9/03/2021
The age of American privilege is over
Successful
statecraft aligns interests with circumstance. In the immediate
aftermath of World War II, a generation of statesmen grasping this
essential truth presided over a radical reorientation of basic U.S
policy. The result was a half-century of American global primacy.
Now,
however, the era of American primacy has ended. The imperative of the
present moment is to adjust U.S. policy to rapidly changing
circumstances. In the two decades since 9/11, members of the foreign
policy establishment have sought to finesse or avoid this issue. The
failure of America’s 20-year war in Afghanistan suggests that this is no
longer possible.
Writing in 1948, George Kennan, director of the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff, made an essential point. “We
have about 50 percent of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3 percent of
its population,” he wrote. “Our real task in the coming period is to
devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this
position of disparity.”
With this purpose in mind, Kennan’s
associates, chief among them George Marshall, Dean Acheson, James
Forrestal and Paul Nitze — White males all — undertook a series of
initiatives aimed at perpetuating this position of disparity. Their
approach centered on devising mechanisms to project American power
globally.
Among their best-known initiatives were the Truman
Doctrine, the Marshall Plan and NATO. Hardly less important was the
National Security Act of 1947, which, among other things, created the
CIA; NSC-68, a secret document that in 1950 committed the United States
to the pursuit of permanent military superiority; and the fashioning of
Strategic Air Command into an instrument of genocidal nuclear attack.
On
balance, throughout the decades-long Cold War, Americans enjoyed a way
of life that made the United States the envy of the world — free,
democratic and prosperous. So at least most Americans themselves firmly
believed.
By this time, the correlation between U.S. policy and
Kennan’s position of disparity had long since begun to unravel. In 2000,
the United States accounted for 32.6 percent of the world’s wealth. A
mere two decades later, America’s share of global wealth had shrunk to
less than 30 percent. Simultaneously, within the United States itself,
the gap between the rich and the non-rich was increasing by leaps and
bounds, contributing to profound domestic unrest.
“Free,
democratic and prosperous” no longer suffices to describe contemporary
America, even in the eyes of many Americans. The postwar formula for
sustaining a position of global privilege is no longer working. Indeed,
it has become irrelevant at best or counterproductive at worst.
Ever
the realist, George Kennan would have unhesitatingly acknowledged that
fact. For that reason, he would certainly have supported President
Biden’s decision to end the war in Afghanistan.
But as a
strategist, Kennan would have gone further, recognizing that the most
pressing threats to American security and well-being are no longer “out
there” in Central Asia or in other distant theaters but “back here.”
Those threats include disease, climate chaos, environmental
deterioration, porous borders, the erosion of personal privacy and,
perhaps most insidiously, the unraveling of domestic comity.
The
paradigm of power projection, with its emphasis on military intervention
abroad, no longer provides a relevant response to these threats.
The
genius of Kennan and his contemporaries was to recognize the imperative
of fundamentally changing America’s approach to the world. The lesson
of Afghanistan, confirmed by the astonishing display of incompetence
that has accompanied the U.S. withdrawal, is that it’s past time for the
present generation to do the same.
The American war in
Afghanistan ends in bitter humiliation. But it should also serve as a
wake-up call. The age of American privilege is gone for good.
- WP Sep 02 2021
Covid19 - Is Singapore ready for the big influx of Delta variant?
How safe would Singaporeans be? How effective are the vaccines in protecting the lives of Singaporeans now that ineffective prevention of infection is a foregone conclusion? The hordes in the dormitories are going to be released, assuming that the vaccines are effective in preventing them from being infected and preventing them from transmitting the virus. If these assumptions are false, then we will know how serious things will be in 2 to 3 weeks.
Are Singaporeans ready for an exponential increase in infection at a level we have not seen before and to live with the virus as a way of life? Look at the transmission rate among the bus drivers.
Are we sure this is the way to go? Don't panic, more than 80% have been vaccinated, going to be 100%. Don't scare, don't scare.