Randoctor

Potkin Azarmehr, an expert on Iranian affairs, provides an enlightening overview of Iran's extensive network of influence in the UK; and reveals startling admissions about how Britain has handled Iranian agents, granting them entry and even residency under religious pretenses. Azarmehr expresses astonishment and frustration over the UK's immigration policies, especially towards individuals linked to significant positions within Iran's political hierarchy, such as members of the “Assembly of Experts”. He critically examines the potential risks and oversights of the British establishment, raising concerns about possible infiltration and the lack of effective implementation of new national security measures intended to combat foreign influence. His narrative blends a detailed critique with personal exasperation at the ongoing policy failures. "It's mind-blowing, even for someone like me who's investigated a lot of these things." - Azarmehr expresses his astonishment at the depth of Iran’s infiltration. "The paper makes a recommendation to the MI5 about bringing back the subversion operation, it's referring to something called Operation Foot." - He highlights recommendations for counteractions similar to historical precedents. "In the last 20 years, Britain has given at least 100 visas for Iranian agents to come over as ministers of religion or as religious workers." - Azarmehr on the surprising number of visas granted to potential Iranian agents. "You're talking about a hostile state that chants death to England every Friday...it's just like a, you know, free for all." - Critique of the UK’s lax policies towards a recognized hostile state. "Is it stupidity? Is it madness? Or have they been bribed?" - Questions the rationale behind Britain's security policies. "There is a network of an Islamic network within the Home Office...working hard to employ and recruit more Muslims into the Home Office and issue more visas for Muslims." - Allegations of infiltration within the UK Home Office. "Forget bringing legislation. You've got all the legislations that you need. You just can't implement it." - Criticism of the UK government's failure to enforce existing laws. "Where is this being implemented? Because there's clearly people here that are acting on behalf of the Iranian regime." - Concerns over the lack of enforcement of the Foreign Influence Register Scheme. "As you can see, because, you know, five hours before, we knew that drones and missiles were on their way to Israel." - Discussing the predictability of Iran’s military strategies. "It looked like it was more of a propaganda exercise for its own supporters to save face." - Analysis of Iran’s military actions as largely symbolic.

John Beaudoin of "The Real CDC,"delves into the alarming shifts in death patterns that starkly contrast the years 2020 and 2021, spotlighting a transformative period marked by the onset of COVID-19 and the subsequent rollout of what he terms "COVID immunization gene drug therapy injections." The essence of his book’s thesis emerges through a meticulous examination of three distinct profiles. "The symptom spectrum profile, the age spectrum profile, and the seasonality profile of excess deaths, deaths more than normal, changed starkly". This shift—from respiratory issues in 2020 to circulatory and blood-related causes in 2021—paints a grim picture. Moreover, the age spectrum profile saw a dramatic shift, with the average age of excess deaths dropping from 81 years in 2020 to about 65 in 2021. This change underscores not only a broadening of the demographic impact but also the profound effect of 2021s new therapy(!). Seasonality, typically observed in patterns of winter peaks corresponding with flu and pneumonia, underwent a radical change. As he notes, "The seasonality went from winter and then it turned off in the summer." The persistent, all-year-round pattern of deaths in 2021, deviating from the historical norm, suggests an unusual persistence of lethal threats beyond the cold months, challenging the conventional understanding of seasonal health trends. Rooted in detailed analysis and personal inquiry, John Beaudoin not only charts the statistical changes but also challenges the audience to confront the possible underlying causes—related to the medical treatments employed during the pandemic.. "The definition of the word vaccine was changed in all dictionaries in 2020 for this to be fit into that category. And the reason is the word vaccine was already an accepted word and an accepted medical treatment within the public. They use the word "booster" to fool people into thinking that they're getting their immune system boosted."

The speaker provides a scathing review of the UK’s political landscape, describing the current Conservative government as the worst in living memory and expressing concern over the prospect of an even less competent government potentially coming to power. He compares the situation to what might be seen as an extremely unfavorable scenario in the U.S., akin to having a leader worse than Joe Biden. With the upcoming elections on May 2nd, there's a faint hope for improvement, but the outlook remains grim. The discussion also critiques the London mayor's efforts as merely adding to the nation's embarrassment. The speaker addresses issues impacting various sectors including agriculture, education, and healthcare, where he describes the National Health Service (NHS) as fundamentally flawed and financially unsustainable: "The NHS is fundamentally flawed in every way; it’s billions of pounds in debt." On social issues, the speaker is critical of the transgender movement and the Black Lives Matter movement, accusing them of exacerbating social divides without genuine bases for their activism: "These protests are funded by people like George Soros and are not genuine." He observes that many involved in these movements cherry-pick data to justify their existence, contributing little to genuine societal improvement. The influence of the Socialist Workers Party, particularly in organizing protests without a true understanding among participants, is highlighted. The speaker notes that many protestors seem disconnected from the realities they protest against, merely following a trend of government dissatisfaction: "Majority of people at these protests don’t know what they are protesting for." The speaker passionately argues for the need to critique Islam as openly as Christianity, highlighting a disparity in societal standards: "Why is it that Christians and Catholics can be mocked... but yet the moment you decide that you want to mock or criticize Islam, all hell breaks loose?" This call for an equal footing in religious critique underscores a broader plea for fairness in public discourse. Furthermore, he predicts dire consequences if the Socialist Workers Party were to gain significant power, suggesting it could lead to the destruction of foundational capitalist principles: "If the Socialist Workers Party got enough support to influence the government, it would mean destruction." He also voices concern that the Labour Party, which traditionally should represent labor interests, has drifted and might exacerbate the nation's woes if they come to power: "Our government isn’t conservative; their policies post-2019 are very liberal." Lastly, the entrenched bureaucracy of the civil service is criticized for stalling significant changes and reforms needed to address ongoing crises: "The civil service has too much power and it hinders any significant political change." This bureaucracy is seen as a major barrier to effective governance, holding back necessary political and social reforms.

Retsef Levi's Strategic Oversight: Pandemic Policy and Academic Standards

Steve Milloy passionately critiques the misuse of science, specifically epidemiology and risk assessment, to advance agendas under the guise of public health and environmental protection. Steve passionately critiques the misuse of science, particularly epidemiology and risk assessment, to forward agendas under the pretense of public health and environmental protection. With a foundation in science, statistics, and law, he has spent over three decades exposing what he terms "junk science"—scientific research and conclusions he views as manipulated or flawed, used to support harmful or misleading policies. Mr. Milloy illuminates issues in epidemiology, environmental regulation, and public health crises, arguing that often, fear and regulatory actions significantly outweigh the actual risks. Key topics include his criticism of linear no-threshold models for radiation exposure, the challenges in nuclear energy development due to regulatory overreach, and the misrepresentation of environmental and health risks such as radon exposure and asbestos. We also delve into broader themes of scientific integrity, regulatory overreach, and the impact of misinformation on public policy and perception. Top 10 Quotes: Junk Science Definition: "Junk science is bad science used to advance a special agenda." Personal Background: "I have... background in science and statistics. I'm also a lawyer." Epidemiology Critique: "The vast majority of epidemiology is just junk science(s)." EPA Risk Assessments: "I learned very quickly from EPA that epidemiology was just being completely abused." Radon Misinformation: "The scare is largely based on the epidemiologic study of underground uranium miners...and then the EPA just extrapolated that." Linear No Threshold Model: "The linear no-threshold model...assumes that if something causes cancer at very high doses, then any exposure can cause cancer." Radiation Risks Misunderstood: "There has never been any science to it [linear no-threshold model]. It's just an assumption." Fukushima Misinterpretation: "A thousand people died not because of the radiation but because of the panic induced by the evacuation." Asbestos Misconceptions: "Asbestos was a huge issue...the asbestos was perfectly safe (undisturbed) in the schools." Scientific Misinformation and Fear: "People are just terrified about radiation and they think that it's going to cause mutations and cancer."

The post-World War II transformation of national identity, marked by Marxist influence in education that demonized nationalism created a social divide. This division contrasts the globalist inclinations of the elite with the working class' attachment to traditional values. There's a nostalgia for the unity and patriotism of the 1980s-1990s America, presented as a counterpoint to current progressive and elitist policies. Concerns are raised over the shift from working-class issues to identity politics and environmental activism has led to the converse support for political figures and movements that embody nationalist sentiments, such as Trump and Brexit. Scott and Daniel advocates for a cultural and political revival that challenges progressive dominance. Selected Quotes: from Daniel: National Unity and Misinterpretation: "National identity is a unifier. But what we let happen since World War Two is that we let nationalism be speared with Nazism." Marxist Influence on Education: "And it was Marxist historians doing this and they controlled the narrative. And they were writing the school textbooks, you know, and the people writing our school textbooks were Marxists." Historical Distortion: "In Britain, one of the most influential was a guy called Hobsbawm... The school textbooks were written by self-declared Marxists." Casualties for Ideology: "It happened with Hobsbawm about once I ever saw in an interview where he was asked about the number of people who had been killed in communist slaughters around the world. And his reply was that essentially you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs." Unlimited Casualties for a Utopia: "So what that essentially means is that people who were writing our school textbooks thought that any number of deaths would be okay to create a socialist utopia." Redefining Grievances: "They then co-opted race as a shortcut to grievance because class wasn't working for them." Working Class Abandonment: "So what we saw then is that the left abandoned the working class and didn't want to represent them anymore." Class Division and Perception: "And if you look at it on a class basis, the higher you get up the social scale, the more these insane academic ideas of self-hatred are prevalent." Global Citizenship vs. National Loyalty: "The higher you get on the social scale, the more likely you are to consider yourself a citizen of the world with no loyalty to your particular place and people." Dichotomy of Values: "The higher up you are, the more you want to destroy all those things and create something better. And the lower down you are, the more you want to preserve what little you’ve got." Historical and Academic Control: "And they were writing the school textbooks... the people writing our school textbooks were Marxists." Normalization of Extreme Ideologies: "And they took this idea that nationalism is Nazism and they pressed it into every school they could, every college, every university." Misrepresentation of Nationalism: "But what we let happen since World War Two is that we let nationalism be speared with Nazism." Class and Political Preferences: "Voting for Trump or something like voting for Brexit in the UK, it’s class divided." Disconnect from Traditional Values: "The higher you get on the social scale, the more likely you are to... have no loyalty to your particular place and people." from Scott: Critique of the Status Quo: "I don't want to conserve much of anything because I think the status quo sucks." Idealization of the Past: "Like in the United States, we're talking about the 1980s-1990s, which, you know, when I grew up, you had a much more unified, much more patriotic, much more free society." Elitism and Socialism: "It's a great irony that the people who think they're socialist and the people who think that they're going to be levelling things are the worst elitists on the planet." Criticism of Mao Zedong: "Mao Zedong hated the Chinese people with a colossal passion. The guy was a pure psychopath." Skepticism Towards Environmental Policies: "None of the assumptions that you claim to justify all of this behavior and these policies and these not best practices, none of these assumptions actually hold water, right?" Denial of Sea Level Rise: "Sea levels are pretty much what they were in 1800. It's not that the waters are rising, the waters are the same." Reflection on Reagan's Legacy: "The problem with the sort of revival of the 1980s, at least on this side of the pond, I think, was that Ronald Reagan was not able to build a train behind him." Critique of Current Political Leadership: "Part of this is you need politicians who are not the namby-pamby, weak-kneed, conservatives that don't want to do anything to actually fight the left on their own turf."

Scott McKay “Racism, Revenge and Ruin: It's All Obama"

Jonathan Leaf's Making Philosophy Vividly Accessible

Professor Rob Jenkins, an English professor with a rich 38-year tenure in academia at Georgia State University, shares insights shaped by his experiences across various roles in higher education, including as an administrator and college basketball coach. Jenkins's journey reflects a critical engagement with the challenges and transformations within academia and society, especially in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic and the evolving landscape of higher education. Jenkins articulated a nuanced skepticism about the pandemic's governmental responses, suggesting an overblown reaction that spurred him to advocate for the reopening of society. He critically observes, "from the very beginning seemed to me to be overblown... I began advocating for reopening society, reopening schools, reopening universities." Reflecting on the broader implications of administrative dominance in academia, Jenkins laments the erosion of professorial influence, highlighting the shift towards a bureaucratic model that prioritizes administrative objectives over educational and academic values. He critiques the rise of credentialism, noting, "the administrative class... run things. The professors are no longer in charge," pointing out the imbalance this creates within the academic institutions. Jenkins's discourse extends to the societal penchant for security over liberty, warning against the historical and ongoing use of fear by governments to control populations. He draws parallels with his observations on COVID-19, stating, "governments have to control their population. And the easiest way to control people is through fear." Moreover, Jenkins's dedication to fostering critical discourse led him to contribute to the Brownstone Institute, emphasizing the importance of platforms that challenge prevailing narratives. This reflects his commitment to truth, stating, "I really wanted to write for Brownstone... I admired the people who were writing for them." His critique of politicized science, particularly around pandemic policies, underscores a broader concern with the selective use of scientific evidence for political ends. Jenkins contends, "closing the schools is another issue. It was obvious to me that that wasn't necessary. So why were we doing it? Because we were playing politics with this virus." Addressing the consequences of lockdown measures, Jenkins highlights the disproportionate impact on students and young people, acknowledging the "real loss" and challenges faced by this demographic, thereby emphasizing the need for a balanced approach to public health crises. Jenkins also reflects on the personal and professional growth prompted by the pandemic, including the forced adaptation to online teaching. He notes a shift in his stance towards online education, recognizing its potential benefits and applicability under certain conditions. In discussing the trajectory of political systems towards authoritarian models, Jenkins posits, "all modern political systems basically devolve into fascism," warning of the dangers inherent in unchecked governmental power and the erosion of individual freedoms. Finally, Jenkins's thoughts on the enduring struggle between individual liberty and societal security resonate as a call to critically evaluate the trade-offs inherent in governance and policy-making. He asserts the importance of maintaining a vigilant stance against the encroachment of authoritarian tendencies, underscoring the value of freedom and the role of education in cultivating a society capable of navigating these complex dynamics. Professor Robin Jenkins' reflections offer a critical lens on the interplay between politics, education, and societal values. His experiences and writings advocate for a society that values truth, liberty, and the importance of challenging authority for the betterment of all.

Dr. James A. Thorp, who practices maternal-fetal medicine and is a prominent medical researcher, has recently made significant and alarming discoveries related to COVID-19 vaccines and their impact on pregnancy outcomes and menstrual function. In his groundbreaking study titled "COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function," Dr. Thorp reveals that COVID-19 vaccinations are associated with a substantial increase in adverse effects. These effects include menstrual abnormalities, miscarriages, fetal chromosomal abnormalities, fetal malformations, cystic hygroma, cardiac disorders, arrhythmias, cardiac arrest, vascular malperfusion, and growth abnormalities. The speed at which the COVID-19 vaccines were developed and rolled out to the general population was unprecedented, thanks to Operation Warp Speed. However, historically, vaccines undergo an average of 10-12 years of rigorous clinical trials before being authorized for widespread administration. Dr. Thorp's research highlights the potential risks of deploying these novel SARS-CoV-2 vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) within just 10 months of their development. At the onset of the pandemic, these vaccines were hailed as the primary solution to the crisis, as early treatment strategies for COVID-19 were (WRONGLY!?) deemed ineffective. In the wake of his groundbreaking findings and the public's growing concern about the potential negative effects of COVID-19 vaccines, Dr. James A. Thorp faced unexpected repercussions. Despite the scientific importance and relevance of his research, he was surprisingly fired from his position. This decision seems odd in light of a Project Veritas video featuring Pfizer director Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker in which he openly admitted that there was something unusual about the impact of the COVID-19 shots, especially in relation to women's reproductive health. He revealed that Pfizer was well aware of the alterations in menstruation associated with the administration of their mRNA-based vaccine. However, they appeared to downplay the significance of these findings and did not express much concern about this particular aspect. Despite being a pharmaceutical giant that had administered its product to billions of people worldwide, Pfizer seemingly had limited understanding of the exact mechanisms causing these changes in women's reproductive health. Dr. Walker mentioned that the company was uncertain about the reasons behind these effects and expressed doubt if they would ever fully comprehend them. The firing of Dr. Thorp and the revelations in the Project Veritas video stirred controversy and raised questions about the transparency of pharmaceutical companies, the dissemination of vital research, and the ethical considerations surrounding the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. The situation underscored the importance of open dialogue, scientific integrity, and the need for further investigation into the potential long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccines on various populations, particularly pregnant individuals and women's health. Dr. Thorp's research serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of evidence-based decision-making and the continuous pursuit of knowledge in the field of medicine.

Kevin McKernan conducted a study that raises questions about the impurity content of mRNA vaccine, suggesting it may contain fragments of DNA.