We're at the point, mid-May, that wherever you go on social media, good people are asking why, why, why and at the same time, the answer is right there. Interesting that we're struggling with this at N.O. as well, at exactly the same time that Polly is over in Ontario. Also Adam in Australia. That should tell people something.
This post opens with Polly's Bitchute again, only this time I got it working and had to shorthand write because if I stopped the video to write, it was lost each time. Won't even start to get into that. Anyway, here is roughly what she said:
None of it makes sense - can't buy non-essentials, who decides what is and isn't to essentil [to a mother]? [Baby] shoes and milk non-essential? Over 200 days, the cases keep climbing, they're looking for new ways to lockdown, test and mask. Quarantine, Can't hug, can't look at anyone.
Well, it does actually make sense if you know the angle to look at it from, if you or others you are reading have been able to crack the code and are trying to bring it to others before being shut down.
That's the crux of this matter. [Clever word choice there, Polly.]
Occult secret societies [alarm, klaxon that's like the S word - mock her, burn her, ostracise her, turn away, turn away] work this way [ask the Masons]:
They initiate you into the organisation, you become privy to just enough secrets to feel very special - you learn how to speak to other novices out there, how to recognise, you have little codes such as handsigns and other symbolism - monarch butterfly for example. The things you say out there to fellow "members" will mean nothing to the uninitiated- it will make no sense to them.
But it does make sense to people not in the cult who have, one way or the other [see Assange, Kelly, Seth Rich] cracked the code and are horrified to the point of pouring it out, exposing it [see pizzagate post here]. These people rarely live long if it's specific knowledge which names names and nobbles high-ups directly, the other pests are just mocked and marginalised.
Them continually speak in double-speak to others of the cult, which those unaware can make no sense of [even if they notice, which so many do not - why would they? It's so far outside of their experience.]
What those trying to explain these things, having cracked the code or having gathered data from those who have - what we must do is to clear the fog from the mind and stop asking one question in particular - why?
Because the “why” of it is already answered.
[Polly now plays a clip by:]
A guy trying to make sense of it all, a regular guy, baffled that there is a scientific method, an empirical method which has stood for centuries now, but it appears to have been abandoned in the public health sphere. They entirely fail to adopt the scientific spirit in the face of growing hysteria.
This good [but baffled] person wonders why, then he goes on to say [those weasel words]:
"I'm not a conspiracy theorist."
[Yes, he feels the need to say that, just in case anyone thought he was saying there might be collusion in public life and he wants to make clear that he does not believe in any collusion whatever, no way, he's a Rationalist through and through. Polly goes on to comment:]
Interesting about him imagining himself to be "scientific". Doesn't [empirical] science involve revising an opinion, a hypothesis, when new evidence appears?
Especially in the face of [extant] methods not working? Ineffective measures, destructive, minlmal changes to policies, to the plan and not only that, but they then recommend these non-changes, they enforce it, put it into law. While there has been shown to be no attending evidence, the man said - they insist wrongness prevails [see Fauci, Whitty] - a complete loss of the scientific spirit.
"I don't have answer," says the man.
[Polly repeats what he said and then asks:] Isn't the scientific spirit, the method, the procedure, to recalibrate if new evidence comes in?
And now she gets to the crux, which is also the crux of this post:]
But he won't recalibrate, he refuses to, he has a "reversive blockade", he simply will not let certain information come in, [he psychologically cannot handle what is standing out like a sore thumb].
He asks, "Why is it not working?" But it is working, it's working fine - just not in the way he thinks it means, not in the way he wants it to mean.
[Now Polly is not speaking here of the loony left, of the Woke - they have zero problem believing in the unworkable, especially when young. Nope, this is more the Rational Right, the ones who worship Science in all things - the older, the more hardwired. They simply shake the head, even give a laugh or smirk - no way known they are going to accept bizarre hypotheses about what is really going down.
In fact, they will design clever scientific theories to account for it [scientific method, you know], which are revised once shown to be wrong. [We see this, for example, in dark matter at the end of the solar system, we see it in the Higgs boson, in all the Scientific Orthodoxies which somehow don't [cough] cover all contingencies.
The theoretical warfare between theoretical physicists would be amusing if not costing so much in resources. Is this a zero sum? Do I reject the scientific method?
Goodness no, but I’d still point out, just quietly, that humans can perceive a certain amount and no more, so can whales, horses, an amoeba. Every species has limits of perception. In our case, imagination then fills in the blanks.
All right, I'm getting off that and moving this post along, finishing up what Polly said. She's not even approaching it from a sky fairy perspective, she's approaching it from the good ole Marxism perspective:]
It's all about the new rules you must accept under all sorts of names, it's about all the political measures they want to bring in. They first have to wreck the old, destroy it, [destroy, destroy destroy!!!]
They have to break our [pesky] old habits and kill off the elderly and others who won't change. [In order for stage 5 nirvana to be miraculously ushered in under kindly old maitreya.] The uninitiated can't see this [but those who have cracked the code can - very much so and they start the resistance.]
Right, let's move onto a classic case of Tory Toby going back to the fold [LDS]. This is from this morning's newsletter:
Dear James Higham,
Boris holds his nerve
By Toby Young
Hang on, this is Lockdown Sceptics who've been railing for months at Carrie Johncock, no? It's not Guido? Quick check.
In spite of a last-minute lobbying campaign by various SAGE panjandrums to postpone step three of the Prime Minister’s roadmap, most parts of the U.K. will be easing restrictions on Monday.
Oh can't we at least concede this to Boris, can't we at least cut him some slack?
Wot, after how he's behaved for a year? And it hasn't ended, oh no, not by a long jab.
But Boris struck a cautious note on Sunday evening. BBC News [noted].
He seriously quotes the BBC at us lockdown sceptics? And here it is, buried way down below:
From Monday, millions of people will be able to socialise indoors in limited numbers, hug loved ones ...
Oh calloo callay, the Beloved Leader has allowed us a brief respite? Quick, all to the streets, let's all join hands and sing songs of praise to our Beloved Leader. "Kumbaya, dear Carrie, Kumbaya ..."
But Mr. Johnson said everyone needed to still be cautious, and also get tested twice a week ...
Er ... sorry ... come again?
... and also get tested twice a week ...
Moving on ... to Adam downunder:
... if Jordan Peterson is just dumb or if he’s a virtue signaling attention whore ...
Off to be vaccinated today. Despite having Covid last May, my antibody levels appeared insufficient to prevent re-infection. Hope Ontario opens up soon.
Without words. Meanwhile, a true nutter, not unlike Silverman, apparently speaks, ta for the heads-up, haiku:
Brain? Let's not get personal, I suppose. Meanwhile, Ann Barnhardt is a strange woman, Catholic in the extreme, and yet she recognises the threat to the Church by the anti-Pope. Not being Catholic, I'll take that no further.
Perhaps the last thing to be said for now about 42 is that those of us who've had access to the cracked code and are thus highly suspicious and cautious, are ultrasensitive to phraseology - I've been suspicious of Toby Young's cred for some time as a dissident in the way that, say, our commenters here are dissident and maybe Vox Day across the pond - it's the choices of topic, the way they're couched, the dismay we knew Jordan Peterson would eventually cause, it's seeing that our chaps and chapesses seem able to get it, so why not these high fliers? They don't seem to get it at all.
As Polly was on about earlier.