Tag Archives: Robert Kennedy Jr.

Changing The Dynamic On Vaccines

Posted on by

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is known to be somewhat skeptical on vaccines–very skeptical on the Covid-19 vaccine. In the end, that may be a good thing for America’s children.

On Thursday, Hot Air posted an article about one possible impact of Kennedy’s tenure as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The article reports:

I have an unusual perspective on RFK Jr. I think that his skeptical approach to the current vaccination schedule will turn out to be a good thing, not because he will enhance skepticism about the safety and efficacy of vaccines, but because it will do the opposite–for safe and effective vaccines.

The current establishment chant is that any and all vaccines are an unalloyed good for everyone, always. To put it mildly, that simply cannot be true. It is a mantra, not a scientific conclusion, and the reason why the mantra is repeated so persistently is that public health officials are so scared that people will mistrust vaccines that they feel the need to force a unified message and brainwash people.

That was made obvious during COVID. You can even go read the transcripts of meetings within the CDC and FDA discussing the pros and cons of the mRNA vaccines, and the officials kept talking about ensuring that all messaging was simplified and unified. No nuance, no discussion, no informed consent. The belief was that keeping people UNinformed was crucial.

That’s why the FDA’s top two vaccine officials eventually bolted–right in the middle of the pandemic. The propaganda being put out was so deceptive that they couldn’t stand behind it.

The article notes:

Between birth and six years old, children are supposed to receive at least 30 different vaccinations, excluding the multiple mRNA COVID-19 shots. What is the likelihood that there are no downsides, side effects, interactions, immune system effects, or other unintended consequences? It’s an interesting question, and one that isn’t really studied in a systematic way. Many of these vaccines are barely tested before being rolled out.

My suspicion is that the safety and effectiveness vary quite a bit among the various vaccines out there, and I am absolutely certain that the vaccine schedule is unlikely to be suboptimal at the very least.

The article explains the upside of Kennedy’s skepticism:

Everybody who is worried that RFK, Jr. is undermining faith in vaccines seems to have missed the fact that people have lost trust in public health officials for very good reasons. We demand that it is the skeptics, not the pro-vaccine fanatics, who examine the evidence and tell us the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Do I assume RFK, Jr. is right about his opinions about vaccines? No. But it’s not like he has ripped all the vaccines off the market–he’s hired good scientists to delve into the evidence and report to all of us what they find. Inform us. I suspect that the answers will differ from vaccine to vaccine, and that each vaccine has different risk and benefit profiles.

I am looking forward to those answers.

Looking Through The Lens Of History

Posted on by

On Thursday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about the Senate confirmation hearings. He notes that at the three hearings this week  the Democrats were hoping to stop the nominees, things did not necessarily move in that direction.

The article notes:

But now several of Trump’s most controversial nominees–controversial meaning that the New York Times and The Washington Post really, really hate them–have taken their turn. Today, Robert Kennedy, Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard all testified in confirmation hearings. These are the nominees (along with Hegseth) that the Democrats are seriously determined to block, and you could see it in their hysterical, if sometimes hilarious, questioning.

I was able to watch only brief portions of today’s hearings and don’t have an opinion on how, in general, they went, other than the fact that the Democrats were in full howl-at-the-moon mode.

I hope all three nominees are confirmed, although I could go either way on Kennedy. Even here, though, Kennedy came across as I expected. He is walking away from some of his more out-there positions of years ago, and is focused on “making America healthy again.” I think there is room for him to do considerable good as an advocate for more healthy lifestyles.

But I really hope that Tulsi Gabbard is confirmed. From my own (admittedly minimal) experience with her, I have a great deal of respect for Gabbard’s patriotism, her intelligence–she is very, very smart–and her military bearing. And, to be honest, in my dealings with Gabbard I just liked her.

America’s “intelligence community” is sick and throughly politicized. Tulsi is, I think, a great choice to set it straight. I don’t agree with all of her opinions–my view of the Iraq war is more positive than hers, for instance–but I trust her to oversee an objective, competent and non-politicized intelligence operation. Which is what Trump wants, and a huge improvement.

The article notes a bit of history often overlooked:

The Democrats can’t block any of the President’s nominees, so their grandstanding is directed mostly at their own base. I suppose they also hope to persuade four Republicans to vote against Gabbard and the others. That shouldn’t happen. Of this group, the only one who isn’t plainly an excellent choice is the eccentric Robert Kennedy. But Kennedy, too, is President Trump’s choice, and there is a clear rationale for why he might be a very good Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Beginning with the Clinton administration and until this year, I believe there were only two occasions on which any senator of a president’s party voted against any of his Cabinet nominees. That number grew from two to three when three Republicans voted against Pete Hegseth’s confirmation as Secretary of Defense. Let’s hope that Senate Republicans don’t continue to break with tradition.

If the Republicans are not willing to support their own President’s choices, why should they be considered Republicans? I am willing to support any primary opponent who runs against a Republican who opposes President Trump’s choices.

When Intelligence Became A Political Operation

Posted on by

A friend sent me a link to the article below along with the following note:

Since Obama political appointees have infiltrated the Intelligence Community, it has gone political.   No one before Obama put political appointees there.  For example, in 2012 Obama put his White House lawyer as the NSA AG – never done before – always someone who knew the mission and had risen through the ranks held every position BUT the Director.  As Congress has to approve that position – that is the only position that was ever tainted with politics.  True for all other positions as well.   NSA, NGA, and DIA were always under the Department of Defense umbrella until 911.  After 911 they created a DNI – which caused loyalty issues for those that forgot we took an oath to the constitution not to any department or person.   That’s how Brennan got appointed.   That is how the spying on the Trump campaigned happened – Obama put people in place prior to the 2016 election to enable getting information about the opponent’s campaign to insure HRC won. 

On February 14th, 2021, Zero Hedge posted an article about what has happened to our intelligence community. The article is titled, “Opening The CIA’s Can Of Worms”

The article reports:

“The CIA and the media are part of the same criminal conspiracy,” wrote Douglas Valentine in his important book, The CIA As Organized Crime.

This is true.  The corporate mainstream media are stenographers for the national security state’s ongoing psychological operations aimed at the American people, just as they have done the same for an international audience. 

We have long been subjected to this “information warfare,” whose purpose is to win the hearts and minds of the American people and pacify them into victims of their own complicity, just as it was practiced long ago by the CIA in Vietnam and by The New York Times, CBS, etc. on the American people then and over the years as the American warfare state waged endless wars, coups, false flag operations, and assassinations at home and abroad.

Another way of putting this is to say for all practical purposes when it comes to matters that bear on important foreign and domestic matters, the CIA and the corporate mainstream media cannot be distinguished.

For those who read and study history, it has long been known that the CIA has placed their operatives throughout every agency of the U.S. government, as explained by Fletcher Prouty in The Secret Team; that CIA officers Cord Myer and Frank Wisner operated secret programs to get some of the most vocal exponents of intellectual freedom among intellectuals, journalists, and writers to be their voices for unfreedom and censorship, as explained by Frances Stonor Saunders in The Cultural Cold War and Joel Whitney in Finks, among others; that Cord Myer was especially focused on and successful in “courting the Compatible Left” since right wingers were already in the Agency’s pocket. 

All this is documented and not disputed.  It is shocking only to those who don’t do their homework and see what is happening today outside a broad historical context.

With the rise of alternate media and a wide array of dissenting voices on the internet, the establishment felt threatened and went on the defensive. It, therefore, should come as no surprise that those same elite corporate media are now leading the charge for increased censorship and the denial of free speech to those they deem dangerous, whether that involves wars, rigged elections, foreign coups, COVID-19, vaccinations, or the lies of the corporate media themselves.

There is no way I can summarize this article, so I am asking you to please follow the link and read the entire article.

The article concludes:

Robert Kennedy, Jr., by name and dedication to truth seeking, conjures up his father’s ghost, the last politician who, because of his vast support across racial and class divides, could have united the country and tamed the power of the CIA to control the narrative that has allowed for the plundering of the world and the country for the wealthy overlords.

So they killed him.

There is a reason Noam Chomsky is an exemplar for Hedges, Greenwald, and Taibbi.  He controls the can opener for so many. He has set the parameters for what is considered acceptable to be considered a serious journalist or intellectual.  The assassinations of the Kennedys, 9/11, or a questioning of the official Covid-19 story are not among them, and so they are eschewed.

To denounce censorship, as they have done, is admirable. But now Greenwald, Taibbi, and Hedges need go up to the forbidden gate with the sign that says – “This far and no further” – and jump over it.  That’s where the true stories lie.  That’s when they’ll see the worms squirm.

If we don’t limit the actions of the Intelligence Community and their ability to control the news Americans actually receive, we will lose our republic.