Part One

1\

THE TWO LIVES OF CLIFFORD G GADDY

The First Life (1946-1986)

a thread pic.twitter.com/DF2MX6c7jv

— ghost of daniel parker (@SeekerOTL) October 26, 2020

Part Two 

1\

THE TWO LIVES OF CLIFFORD G GADDY

The Second Life (1987-2020)

a thread pic.twitter.com/RRo8nAfWQx

— ghost of daniel parker (@SeekerOTL) October 26, 2020

Will Jones, TCW Defending Freedom:  Covid vaccines raise risk of severe heart inflammation up to 120-fold, says study

COVID vaccination increases the risk of severe heart inflammation up to 120-fold, a major study from Scandinavia published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) has found.

The study looked at more than 23million patient records covering the over-12 populations of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden from the start of the vaccine rollout in December 2020 to October 5 2021.

For young males aged 16-24 years within 28 days of a second dose the study found severe myocarditis (requiring inpatient hospital admission) around five times more common after Pfizer and 14 times more common after Moderna. This corresponded to six events per 100,000 people after Pfizer and 18 events per 100,000 after Moderna. A second dose of Moderna given after a first dose of Pfizer came with even higher risk: a 36-fold increased risk, corresponding to 27 events per 100,000 people. The Moderna vaccine has three times the dose of mRNA of the Pfizer vaccine, which the authors suggest lies behind the increased risk.

[...]

The authors conclude the risks ‘should be balanced against the benefits of protecting against severe Covid-19 disease’. However, given the extremely low risk of Covid to healthy young males and the considerably elevated risk of severe myocarditis following vaccination – plus the risks associated with other adverse effects, short and long term – it’s hard to see how it could be worth it, or why these vaccines have not already been withdrawn for younger age groups.

Read the rest here.

Mark Wauck:  Disinformation Governance Board: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?

[I]n a global world economy, it becomes increasingly difficult to separate foreign and domestic policy. Thus we see the push to bind the US to foreign treaties and agreements without going through the treaty ratification process as envisioned in the Constitution. Many of those agreements have an effect on domestic policy that should normally be decided by Congress. This is all in line with the aims of the New World Order, the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) goal for Global Corporatism/Fascism (cf., for example, Doc Malone: WEF: A Trade Organization on Steroids).

Preeminently, the Senate’s authority over war making has been preempted by the Rules-Based Order, as we see increasingly (Where The War Is At, 4/28/22). US officials, in coordination with foreign powers in the Anglosphere, are openly making public statements that, in any real world understanding, amount to declarations of war against major world powers, such as Russia and China. But war of this sort is something that can’t be done by stealth, as in our GWOT. Thus, the need to shape America’s information environment—to preempt narratives that conflict with the government narrative. Which happens to be the Deep State/Neocon narrative. Thus, the Disinformation Governance Board is an idea whose time has come for America. The public announcement actually specifies “Russia” as a focus for disinforming the American public and the head of the disinformation board checks all the usual Neocon boxes—even “advising” Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry—so it all fits in with the war effort of the Rules-Based Order.

Among other accounts, PJMedia’s stands out:

Politico is reporting:

DHS is standing up a new Disinformation Governance Board to coordinate countering misinformation related to homeland security, focused specifically on irregular migration and Russia. Nina Jankowicz will head the board as executive director. She previously was a disinformation fellow at the Wilson Center, advised the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry as part of the Fulbright Public Policy Fellowship and oversaw Russia and Belarus programs at the National Democratic Institute. (h/t Daniel Lippman)

Why would a DHS program focus solely on “irregular migration and Russia”? … are these just the most politically dangerous narratives for the Left to lose control over?

Read the rest here.