by Travis Mateer
Michael Robbins is a poet who I thought I could identify with because, in his latest collection of poems, titled Walkman, he talks about not drinking, Christianity, and pop culture.
Then, yesterday, I saw a tweet from Robbins, to which one of his followers replied. Here are the tweets:
I really don’t go looking to pick fights with poets I enjoy reading on Twitter, but I couldn’t let this go without using my first amendment right to express myself, so that’s what I did. Here are some of my tweets (Robbins deleted his responses, but not before I got a screen shot of one of them):
Michael Robbins, in a now deleted tweet, said he DOES struggle with the power THE STATE is grabbing for itself over this pandemic. He even called himself an anti-statist. In a tweet I got a screen shot of, here is Robbins calling me stupid for not jabbing my kids:
While I was waiting for a reply, I flipped through Michael’s book of poems. In one of his poems, there is a line about his sister sending him Klonopin.
Now, I don’t care that Michael Robbins sister committed a crime by sending a controlled substance in the mail to someone who doesn’t have a prescription, but THE STATE might care about it. Why can’t Robbins use his smart poet brain to see where this slippery slope might take us?
And why can’t Robbins use his smart poet brain to see how our “health” industry peddles powerful substances, like Benzodiazepines, without fully informing people of the dangers?
I know this happens because David Boone, a Missoula songwriter, had a good portion of his life destroyed by benzo-toxicity after going to a professional for help with his anxiety. He wasn’t told the risks and had to go through hell to find out the hard way.
Artists are supposed to be helping humanity deal with this crazy world through their art. At least that is what I think artists should be doing.
For example, the science fiction writer, Philip K. Dick, wrote a book about an alternative universe where the Nazis and Japs won WWII, and now that book, titled The Man In The High Castle, is a tv show.
I think Michael Robbins should watch this show because one of the storylines has the son of the main Nazi character get diagnosed with an incurable genetic disease that requires him to be euthanized. Dad gets pretty upset about this, since he hasn’t traded in ALL his empathy for loyalty to the Fuhrer yet.
If Robbins watches this show, he might appreciate how one character decides to choose empathy for an innocent Nazi boy over her loyalty to the resistance, and that choice leads to the good humans stopping the evil humans from nuking the west coast.
Something to think about as our Federal government escalates its war on information and prepares to depict the UNVAXXED as bio-medical terrorists to be feared like Muslims after 9/11.
JC
Information I have on hand from the book What Really Makes You Ill, by Lester and Parker suggests that vaccines are the cause of the following: In 1983 one in 10,000 children was autistic, by 2014 (latest available data from CDC ASD web page), one in 59 is. What, pray tell, has changed in the human genome (nothing) or our environment (hmmm … multiple vaccines?) to cause this?
Of course, the standard response from PhRMA and doctors and pundits is ridicule, character assassination, and argumentum ad lapidem, or appeal to the stone. None deal in hard evidence.
The ‘dangerous experiment’ is, in my view, failing to vax one’s children and waiting to see whether they get infected, get sick, get ‘long COVID,’ and/or spread the virus. If I understand the subplot, your argument is that (a) Big Pharma sometimes cuts corners, skews data, has a revolving door with the FDA, bribes Congress and physicians, and has marketed drugs knowing they had undisclosed side effects or dangers; (b) big vaccine manufacturers designed and/or are manufacturing COVID-19 vaccines; (c) therefore, risking infection of one’s self and/or one’s children with SARS-CoV-2 is more responsible than subjecting one’s self and/or one’s children to the possibility of unkown dangers or side effects from COVID-19 vaccination.
The argument suffers from two serious flaws: (1) it depends upon the misdeeds of the pharmaceutical industry extending to (a) some vaccines; (b) most vaccines; (c) all vaccines; (d) vaccines for U.S. consumption; (e) these (U.S. EUA COVID-19) vaccines; (2) it fails to take account of (a) the data compiled since the pandemic commenced; (b) the opinions — prevailing and dissenting — of disinterested virologists & epidemiologists.
(1)(a): a long discussion would be entailed, but for brevity let’s take this one as assumed, arguendo.
(1)(b): an even longer discussion, but for brevity, I assert that this is easily refuted.
(1)(c): the falsity of this one is self-evident (unless, perhaps, we are a computer simulation).
(1)(d): same discussion as in (b), with the same assumption arguendo as in (a), except that the incidence of this is a very, very low subset of the one assumed to exist in (a).
(1)(d): all Western developers of COVID-19 vaccines were guilty of: releasing pre-prints of articles (accepted for peer review and publication, but not yet published) and issuing self-serving press releases. The Oxford-Astrazenica adenoviral vector technology effort was afflicted with documentation errors during clinical trials. That effort (unlike Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson) was intended to be a non-profit endeavor, with the objective of the vaccine costing $2-$3 per dose. Once the Astrazenica vaccine was released in the UK, the occurrence in 100 among 20.6 million vaccinees, of a rare disorder of blood clots and low platelets, causing death in 22 of them, led to suspension of that vaccine, then guildelines and restrictions that were quickly adopted by most countries. See, New York Times Post, April 18, 2021:
“…The Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid vaccine was approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) several months ago in the UK. Since then, millions of doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine have been administered to people in the UK. However, the rollout of the vaccine has not been without its setbacks.
“In recent weeks, the AstraZeneca vaccine has faced significant scrutiny over cases of rare blood clots in recipients.
“The latest data from the MHRA, published on April 15, explained an estimated 20.6 million first doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were given out in the UK by April 5.
“Up to April 5, the MHRA had received Yellow Card reports of 100 cases of “major thromboembolic events (blood clots) with concurrent thrombocytopenia (low platelet counts)” in the UK following vaccination with the AstraZeneca jab.
“The MHRA report added the events occurred in 61 women and 39 men aged from 18 to 85 years.
“The overall case fatality rate of these events stood at 22 percent with 22 deaths.
“In the UK, people under the age of 30 are now advised to receive an alternative vaccine to the AstraZeneca vaccine.
“Other nations have also implemented age limits on who should receive the AstraZeneca vaccine.
“However, for the vast majority of people, experts agree the protection the AstraZeneca vaccine offers against COVID-19 outweighs the risks.”
(2)(a): It’s beyond all reasonable dispute that: (i) mRNA COVID-19 vaccination prevents serious disease and death, in persons infected with all variants of SARS-CoV-2. (ii) COVID-19 has, in the U.S., become a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” COVID-19 diagnoses, hospital admissions, and deaths are surging in states with the lowest vaccination rates. 99% of COVID-19 deaths are occurring aming unvaccinated pwersons. (iii) the number of documented ‘serious’ adverse reactions to the FDA EUA mRNA vaccines, relative to the hundreds of millions of doses administered,is infintesmal. (iv) the Delta variant is producing disease and deaths in young adults and children. There is no virological evidence that it (or any variant) is “more transmissible” or “more virulent,” but it is apparently “more fit” and, like other viruses, the most fit variants outcompete and dominate, in a continuous, dynamic process.
(2)(b): The overwhelming weight of considered professional opinion among virologists, epidemiologists, and immunologists is that (i) it is human behavior driving the continuing pandemic, i.e. vaccine avoidance and high-risk group behavior; (ii) both the magnitude of risk, and gravity of harm, from vaccine avoidance far, far exceeds, by several orders of magnitude, the magnitude of risk and gravity of harm from mRNA vaccination, in all relevant cohorts.
Nice appeal to authority at the end there. You’re possibly unaware that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, said to cause “Covid-19,” a disease with no unique symptoms, has never been isolated, or purified, though virologists around the world claim to have achieved this feat. There is no “gold standard,” and as recently as July of 2020 CDC said it did not possess a genome for it. The supposed genome for the virus is a human construct anyway assembled by a computer process known as “alignment.” How then can there be a specific vaccine directed at a specific virus, not proven to even exist?
Germany’s highest court ruled in 2016 that there was no scientific proof of the existence of the measles virus. The reason is the methodology virologists have been using since 1954 wherein they conjure up a mixture of substances, monkey kidney tissue, antibiotics, other stuff, and introduce human tissue (usually snot) supposedly containing a pathogen. They then wait for “cytopathy,” or cell death, and when that occurs they claim it to be caused by the non-isolated virus. They then lift a small DNA sequence and perform alignment. The word “isolation” as used in the process is fraudulent.
The court ruled in the measles case that without a negative control, that is, the same experiment performed without human tissue, there is no conclusive evidence that a virus caused anything. In other words, virology is junk science, and has been since 1954. They do not do negative controls! In fact, a negative control experiment has been done by an independent researcher, though I do not remember the specific virus he was testing for. It might have been SARS-CoV-2, possibly some other variety. He found cytopathy, even without the addition of human tissue. Virology is junk science.
So the question that needs to be answered before your long, long post is this: Does SARS-CoV-2 exist? The burden of proof would be on you. If you cannot provide it, every word that follows is meaningless.
Again, “proof of existence” is not an appeal to authorities. Do better.
This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It’s very sad when a person is convinced he is in possession of the Truth, and he denigrates everyone else (they, of course, conform to the Received Narrative) while believing himself to be a bold investigator of his own beliefs—but all along, he is the one who is deluded. Buddy, you ain’t half as smart as you think you are, and you are 100% wronger than you dream you could be. I’d say “do better,” but you won’t, because you can’t. You’re locked in a prison of self-regard and absolute ignorance, taken by you, of course, for enlightenment. “Sad!” as someone likes to say.
And, when there is a safety question, it’s easy to suspend use of a vaccine. The same cannot be said about a pandemic.
Travis, sorry to mess on your blog. This guy pushed my buttons.
I would hope the three of us can agree that we have the first amendment right to at least have this conversation, regardless of what we think, and regardless of the sources of information we have used to arrive at our decisions, decisions that are VERY personal and shouldn’t necessitate the levels of coercion I am witnessing from corporations and a legacy media that had no qualms perpetrating false narratives for warmongers so they could concoct a justification to commit war crimes in places like Iraq.
Mr. Hunt will not reappear … I met him on a ground he was not comfortable defending: Why does he believe what he believes? People are never comfortable in that regard, as they do not realize that every opinion they have was first someone else’s, adopted as their own because they passively absorb their environment. That would be media, including news and entertainment, none of it true, all of it passively internalized. You write as if Mr. Hunt and I are on equal footing, merely in disagreement. We are not. He absorbs the culture around him. I question it. I question everything. That is what honest people must do. Question all authority all the time.
I consider both you and Kevin to be good, well-intentioned people, so let’s just move on.
I know the drill. Why csn’t we all just get along, and most importantly, all opinions are equal.