Jimmy Carter, the 39th U.S. President has died at the age of 100.
Jimmy Carter once went fishing near Plains, Georgia when he saw a white rabbit swimming toward his boat. The rabbit was hissing menacingly at him and Jimmy called it the ‘killer rabbit’—hence this cartoon. My first attempt at caricature was Jimmy Carter. He was easy to draw—big hair and big smile. A lot of editorial cartoonists had a field day when Carter ran for re-election against Reagan. They both made great cartoon caricatures. Carter lost in a landslide. As it turned out, Americans were ready to move on. The country was plagued by very high inflation, an energy crisis, as well as an outright recession. Carter tried to solve the malaise by forcing Americans to deal with less. If homes were cold in the winter he wanted the people inside to put on sweaters. Summer heat meant using fans—not air conditioners. He lowered the speed limit to 55 mph on the nation’s highways. Everyone in large states such as Texas and Montana were greatly annoyed by that. After his defeat to Reagan, he went on to build houses with “Habitat for Humanity.” Unlike the obviously corrupt Joe Biden, Carter projected an image of civility and decency. Still, Carter left the presidency with an all-time low rating. Biden’s rating will easily be lower when he finally leaves. As an evangelical Christian, Carter was a man of strong faith. Godspeed, Jimmy.
–Ben Garrison
Comment by Geoffrey Churchman
I was living in L.A. at the time of the 1980 presidential election and I liked both Carter and Reagan. They were both gracious types, not motivated by power or fortune — Reagan wanted to reduce the role of government — and Carter had a strong moral compass. He saw the interference of the CIA in other countries, such as in Chile, as inappropriate and took steps against the fascism of the military regime in Argentina in 1977. Most importantly he oversaw the Israel-Egypt peace treaty in 1979 between Begin and Sadat.
Carter’s policies domestically were problematic and why he lost to Reagan after years of stagflation. Another factor at the time was the hostage crisis in Iran after the Islamists seized power.
After leaving office, Carter continued to use his status to use diplomacy to resolve foreign issues and no doubt prevented wars. It’s not recorded what he thought of the corrupt, warmongering Biden, but I doubt it was positive.
Or as Kamala would say, “the significance of the passage of time.”
Just as 2023 saw an awful government voted out in NZ, 2024 saw an atrocious regime in America voted out, although it doesn’t leave office for another 3 weeks. Our fierce criticism of the Biden administration and its actions saw Google remove us from their algorithms — type ‘Waikanae’ into their search box and we don’t feature now. We’re just one of over 3,000 websites Google has done that to. The incoming Trump administration has said it is going to deal with Google’s blatant political interference this coming year.
Locally we saw in 2024 a ridiculous 3 month traffic obstruction at the Old SH1 bridge over the Waikanae River for a grandiose, well-under-used cycle lane.
Worse than that, the housing intensification plans of property businessmen saw two highly controversial pack ‘n’ stack developments, while new streets and houses keep getting added.
Local issues were once again our most viewed posts in 2024, after 5 years of the most viewed subjects being dominated by Covidiocy and things the Jacinda/Chippy government did.
The controversial ultra-expensive grass-roofed bus shelters at Paraparaumu station also had thousands of hits.
More than ever before, we sincerely wish readers a happy 2025.
There was no benefit in terms of reduced covid infections. But ‘vaccinated’ mothers had major adverse events happen to their babies at a rate 4.2X higher than unvaxxed moms. Does anyone care?
This is the conclusion of Dr. Thorp’s most recent paper (“Are COVID-19 Vaccines in Pregnancy as Safe and Effective as the U.S. Government,Medical Organizations, and Pharmaceutical Industry Claim?”) which was accepted for publication in a peer reviewed journal and will be available soon.
This prompted me to have a second look at these results which were first posted on July 14, 2023, over a year ago.
Did you know that the study showed that if you were assigned the vaccine, your child had a stunning 4.2X higher rate of AESIs such as MAJOR congenital abnormalities and developmental delays in just the first 6 months after birth?
Because the trial enrolled fewer women than planned, the effect size reached only the 90% level of significance. Based on just this trial, we are 90% certain that the vaccines made things worse. However, when you look at other data, the certainty approaches 100%.
4.2X is jaw-dropping for an effect size for these types of major birth defect adverse events.
Was there a benefit? Nope. Moms in both groups got the same number of covid infections (2 in each group). Vaccine efficacy estimated at a measly 3.8 (because the groups were different sizes). A perfect vaccine is 100. A vaccine which does nothing is 0. The 3.8 value was both tiny and NOT statistically significant. It’s entirely possible that the vaccine increased your risk of getting covid. We can’t tell from the study.
This was all known more than 5 months ago when the results were first posted.
Why didn’t the CDC warn women that they were wrong?
This double-blinded placebo controlled trial which is considered to be the best evidence in medicine shows that it’s 90% likely it made things worse.
It’s Pfizer’s own data published on Clinical Trials.gov using gold-standard DB-RCT methodology. Anyone can analyze it. It’s in plain sight. Doesn’t get any better than this.
Today, more than 5 months after the lack of any COVID benefit was published on the NIH website (clinicaltrials.gov), the CDC is still silent on this.
Is the entire medical community blind, ignorant, or just corrupt? NOT A SINGLE MAINSTREAM doctor is speaking out. NOT ONE.
Dr. James Thorp got fired for speaking out about the vaccine harms to pregnant women so he’s not mainstream anymore since he’s out of the system. One of the few honest doctors and he gets fired. What does that tell you? His research which has been published in peer-reviewed journals, confirms the results of the Pfizer trial. In spades.
We have a very corrupt medical system where everyone is afraid to tell the truth.
About the Pfizer study on women getting the covid shots during pregnancy
ClinicalTrials URL: NCT04754594 Start date: Feb 16, 2021 Announced date: February 18, 2021. Planned enrollment: 4000 Actual enrollment: 683 First results posted: July 14, 2023 Results including COVID rates posted: June 24, 2024
Participants in the study were enrolled between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation, as part of the inclusion criteria. The trial specifically required healthy women with uncomplicated, singleton pregnancies within this range. 348 maternal participants were enrolled and randomized to receive either the vaccine or placebo. Blinded follow-up: From Day 1 to one month post-delivery. Unblinded follow-up: Extended up to 6 months post-delivery for participants initially vaccinated with BNT162b2.
Why they didn’t do the same for the people who got the placebo is a mystery to me. The reason usually given is that it’s unethical to withhold the COVID vaccine from those that got the placebo.
The study showed it’s 90% certain that the shots increased the rate of special interest adverse events like MAJOR congenital abnormalities and developmental delays in the first 6 months of life, most likely by a factor of 4.2X.
Read the description of AESI which I highlighted in purple for you:
There were 8 AESI’s in the treatment group and only 2 in the larger placebo group.
Let’s do our own statistical analysis on these numbers using a Fisher exact test.
What this means is:
We are 90% certain that women who got the shots had higher AESIs than those getting the placebo
The most likely estimate of the magnitude of the effect is that it was 4.2X more likely in pregnant women who got Pfizer covid shot
What mother wants that? MAJOR congenital abnormalities and developmental delays??!!
Was there a benefit? Nope.
The trial also showed that the covid ‘vaccine’ did NOT work; both groups got EXACTLY the same number of covid infections!
Here you go, right from the document:
In short, the number of cases (which they don’t actually disclose, just the person years in each group) was statistically identical in both arms.
Don’t take my word for it though. It’s right in their statistical analysis:
The VE estimated value was 3.8. Their VE is based on 100. So a perfect vaccine is 100. A vaccine which doesn’t do shit is 0. Their best estimate is 3.8 and the confidence intervals are so huge that it means that there was NO detectable efficacy. They could have had 100X more people and still it’s likely they wouldn’t have been able to find a signal.
There were other COVID infection incidence outcomes (see Outcomes 10 and 11) included in the results and those also were not statistically significant (2-Sided 95% CIs were -466.5 to 94.6 and -104.9 to 86.5, respectively).
It took over 3 years to tell us that there was no covid infection rate difference!
The results were first published on clinicaltrials.gov on July 14, 2023, nearly 2.5 years later (see version 21), but many parts were not reported at the time. But the birth defects were reported (section 19) at that time. So we’ve known about the AESIs for 16 months now.
Notably, since the results were first published, it took almost a full year to count up the 2 covid cases in each of the two groups (a total of 4 covid cases) before they were reported. Why did that take so long?
This is truly the “speed of science” that they were able to do this in just over 3 years! Remarkable.
Bottom line: no difference in risk of covid.
The Pfizer press release
They simply forgot to issue one! So the mainstream media will not cover it.
They expect everyone to monitor clinicaltrials.gov and then read through gobs of pages to figure out what happened.
Fortunately, I don’t have a problem with reading through the data, because sometimes you stumble on stuff that they don’t want you to see.
Papers by Dr. James Thorp showing similar harms to ‘vaccinated’ women
One doctor is speaking out. So they fired him.
Covid-19 ‘Vaccines’: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function ”When normalized by time-available, doses-given, or number of persons vaccinated, all Covid-19 vaccine AEs far exceed the safety signal on all recognized thresholds. These results necessitate a worldwide moratorium on the use of Covid-19 vaccines in pregnancy.”
Are Covid-19 Vaccines in Pregnancy as Safe and Effective as the U.S. Government, Medical Organizations, and Pharmaceutical Industry Claim? Part I “Compared to influenza and all other vaccine products, COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy have demonstrated unacceptable breaches in safety signals across all 37 AEs investigated, 27 antepartum and 10 postpartum/newborn. All 37 AEs breach CDC/FDA limits for safety and are consistent with the authors’ extensive clinical observations. Summary statistics for the deviation of safety signal breaches are described here: mean (n, range) of the PRR was 69.3 (46, 5.37 – 499), z statistic 9.64 (46, 3.29 – 27.0), and Chi-square was 74.7 (26, 28.9 – 148). The magnitude of these safety deviations is unparalleled given the CDC/FDA guidelines defining a PRR ≥ 2 or a Chi-square ≥ 4 as a cause for alarm. The z statistic is informative as it describes the standard deviation of AEs in the COVID-19 vaccines above other vaccines. Most p-values were in the range of one in a million or less.”
The final version of this paper was accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and will be out soon. The new conclusion is at the start of this article. It is stunning to have this published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Increased risk of fetal loss after Covid-19 ‘vaccination‘ “When normalized by time-available, doses-given, or number of persons vaccinated, all Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ ‘AEs far exceed the safety signal on all recognized thresholds. Specifically for miscarriage we found the global relative risk was 177 (95% CI 114.4–283.5) compared to influenza vaccination.”
Summary
The ‘vaccine’ is a total shit-show for pregnant women.
We now know that Pfizer’s own study shows no infection benefit, but a stunning 4.2X higher rate of AESIs such as major congenital abnormalities and developmental delays in just the first 6 months after birth. From Pfizer’s study alone, we are 90% certain the vaccine is harmful. Dr. Thorp’s work cited above reduces the chance of error to close to zero. In his study, all p values were ≤ 0.001 with the majority being <0.000001.
With no benefit and clear harms, the medical community should immediately stop recommending these shots for pregnant women.
Since these results have been known for 5 months and the medical community is still pushing the shots on pregnant women, I believe I can confidently predict that we should expect no changes will happen.
What will Trump’s proposed Surgeon General say? Will anyone dare ask?
European Union foreignministers rebuffed a call to end arms sales to Israel last month, despite mounting evidence of war crimes — and, potentially, genocide — presented to them in an internal assessment obtained by The Intercept.
The contents of the previously unknown 35-page assessment could sway future war crimes trials of EU politicians for complicity in Israel’s assault against Gaza, according to lawyers, experts, and political leaders.
The appraisal was written by the EU’s special representative for human rights Olof Skoog and sent to EU ministers ahead of a council meeting on November 18, as part of a proposal by the head of the EU’s foreign policy to suspend political dialogue with Israel. The proposal was rejected by the council of foreign ministers from EU member states.
Skoog’s analysis laid out evidence from United Nations sources of war crimes by Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah since October 7, 2023, when around 1,200 people were killed during a Hamas-led attack that prompted Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip. The U.N. estimates some 45,000 people have died in Gaza since, with more than half estimated to be women and children.
“History will judge them harshly. And perhaps so will the ICC.”
Though the assessment did not spare Hamas and Hezbollah, much of its strongest language was reserved for the Israel Defense Forces.
From Jeff Louderbeck at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:
President-elect Donald Trump said on 8 December that he will give Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the freedom to investigate the potential link between vaccines and autism if the latter gains Senate confirmation to become Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Kennedy has said for years that autism is likely tied to childhood vaccines.
He was nominated to serve as HHS secretary by Trump last month and has promised sweeping changes to agencies under the HHS, like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The NIH supports and funds research into autism, as well as potential new vaccines.
Kennedy told The Epoch Times in September that he would revamp the NIH to focus on the causes of autism, autoimmune diseases, and neurodevelopment diseases instead of developing drugs and serving as an incubator for pharmaceutical products.
In the Dec. 8 interview with Meet The Press, Trump noted that autism cases have increased in recent decades. When asked if Kennedy would explore the issue, Trump said he is “open to anything.”
“When you look at some of the problems, when you look at what’s going on with disease and sickness in our country, something’s wrong,” Trump said.
“I think somebody has to find out. If you go back 25 years ago, you had very little autism. Now you have it.”
The NZ Medical Council, which does not necessarily have any more medical knowledge than the doctors it licences, directed them to promote the government’s COVID response.
At the same time, the government was running ads implying you would receive unbiased advice from your doctor.
Doctors who questioned faced harsh sanctions for dissenting even though there were questions about the legal effect of the Council’s edict.
A former Council member’s court testimony revealed what he perceived to be a punitive and closed minded culture.
Stifling the doctors made it difficult for the public to inform themselves.
Medical Council’s “guidance” during the pandemic
The New Zealand Medical Council issued a “Guidance Statement” (see below) to doctors, in April 2021, stating “there is no place for anti-vaccination messages in professional health practice”, then enforced it vigorously, at a time when the Government was urging people to get unbiased advice from their doctors. For instance here is an excerpt from one of those ads: “In Aotearoa the below sources provide accurate and reliable information: Your GP, pharmacist, iwi health provider or other health professional.”
This guidance was interpreted to cover many suggestions of alternative or even complimentary action, creating a pall of censorship.
The Medical Council’s purpose is to ensure the doctors maintain standards, but the doctors determine the treatment for their patients.
It is important to emphasise this article is not about the efficacy of the COVID response or vaccine. It is about the public’s right to inform themselves and make their own choices about their health. Many are willing to follow the government’s instructions, but others like to consider the alternatives.
There is no evidence the Medical Council had or has any special insight into COVID but it nonetheless took the position it knew best and it wanted the conversation to be very narrow.
Note many would argue the Covid ‘vaccine’ was not like a traditional vaccine for many reasons. Among other things, it was the first of its kind and there was very little time for development or testing.
Council Member testifies to internal discord
“In September 2021,” Richard Aston testified, “the first wave of complaints about doctors, COVID, vaccines, and the prescribing of Ivermectin came to MCNZ. I was shocked at the different approach Council members had toward these complaints, compared with their normal thorough and fair approach.”
The explosive evidence, which goes to the heart of public faith in the medical profession and government, comes from a former member of the Medical Council in a High Court judicial review case recently.
The Medical Council does not want this affidavit to be available to the public and, indeed, most of it is not at this time. This section is, however, as it has been read out in open court.
Aston, who served a five year stint as Chairman of the Board of Consumer NZ up until 2019, was then appointed to the Medical Council of New Zealand in October that year and remained a member until June 2022. His LinkedIn profile states he remains a lay member on Healthcare Professional Conduct Tribunals.
Handling of complaints against doctors was extreme
“The complaints,” Aston testified, “ranged from a doctor emailing a colleague with doubts about the vaccine, through to doctors advising some patients (e.g. pregnant women and children) not to take the vaccine, to doctors speaking at public meetings against wholesale vaccination of everyone. Aston testified that there was general agreement among most MCNZ members that the COVID vaccine was a zero risk medication, and that doctors who thought the side effect risks were significant were woefully misinformed.
“The approach from MCNZ staff and most MCNZ members was to rely on the guidance statement, which indicated doctors should promote vaccine benefits not highlight risks. That meant that a doctor talking about the risks associated with vaccination was a reason to take disciplinary action.
By now we think readers dismiss pronouncements by the likes of the Stuffers and Globalist journalists like Marc ‘Diddler’ Daalder that “the world has never been hotter”. Yes, there is climate change, but it’s been a natural process for tens of thousands of years. The world needs more CO2 in the atmosphere, not less and the amount of methane in the atmosphere is totally miniscule.
Anyway, here is an armchair travel trip through snowy mountainous scenery in Montenegro in southern Europe.
Bijelo Polje – Bar – Winter ride from snowy mountains to the Adriatic Sea coast
Dramatic evidence has been published in a number of recent science papers that carbon dioxide levels are already ‘saturated’, meaning little or no further warming is to be expected and rising CO2 levels are all beneficial.
Half of human emissions are being quickly pushed back into the biosphere, the scientists say, causing substantial, famine-busting plant growth, while the rest is entering a ‘saturated’ atmosphere and having a minimal effect on global temperatures. One of the papers accepting the human involvement in rising CO2 is published by the CO2 Coalition, which notes: “We like CO2, so should you.”
None of this work will be reported in the mainstream since it disrupts a ‘settled’ climate science narrative tied to the political Net Zero fantasy. But the opinion that humans control the climate thermostat by releasing CO2, leading to runaway temperatures, belongs to a dark period in science when it was captured to promote political aims. However, work continues in sceptical climate circles to understand how a number of gases with warming properties behave in a chaotic, non-linear atmosphere.
Two recently-published papers found that doubling CO2 in the atmosphere led to minimal temperature increases. The calculated figures can be considered to be in margin of error territory and on past observational evidence they pose no threat to the climate on Earth. They also destroy the shaky scientific foundation upon which Net Zero rests.
