Thank you so much for doing this, your work is invaluable. I'm not knees deep in the data and can't keep up with all of the statistics / maths / bio stuff involved so have just a peripheral understanding of what's happening here - but when I read your posts I come away feeling more educated.
I am also alarmed by certain vaccine skeptics being sloppy with their criticisms - It can end up giving ammo to those who want to write off skepticism of the Covid vaccines as "misinformation, dangerous, etc". It wouldn't surprise me if some fake memes / info are dropped into the ecosystem like with the Pfizer drops to cloud the reality of what's happening.
What you have discovered is massively important, but I think the reason it has failed to make waves is because it’s a more nuanced point that undermines the initial Renz disclosure. The Renz disclosure captured the imagination of those fighting for Covid truth because it was more in line with the cover-up tactics we’ve come to expect from the Covid perpetrators. As in “there were massive increases in the DMED data sets after the Covid vaccine, and when this was publicly disclosed, they attempted to hide it by retroactively manipulating the data pre-vaccine to make the rise in injury disappear.” This is a simple, easy to comprehend story and captured the imagination of the community. Once something sticks, it’s hard to course correct to a more accurate account of events. It’s unfortunate, but it plays a lot better than “no, you don’t understand, the DMED database itself is so hopelessly manipulated that it’s all fake. It’s fakeness is evidence in itself that something is vastly wrong and a huge deal as it renders our ability to accurately ascertain safety signals impossible, but we really can’t reach any definitive conclusions about the initial disclosure that captured all your imaginations until we get the real data.”
"I think the reason it has failed to make waves is because it’s a more nuanced point that undermines the initial Renz disclosure."
This is frustrating to read.
What I found does not undermine what Renz and the whistleblowers presented. They had a short shot clock and they're not data experts. They showed as best as they could read what they saw, not knowing the data was twice corrupted. That's not their fault, though a [good] professional data expert would have had the data sense to detect problems.
Also, this is not "nuanced" in any way, shape, or form. This is like a bomb in the building. It threatens everything.
May 18, 2022·edited May 18, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Mathew,that was kind of you- however a 'good professional ' report does indeed undercut the presumed accurate and outrage inducing Renz report. Thry meant well,but it's a bit of crow to swallow when you get shown what you believed to be accurate was not.
( im hoping that made the sense written as it did in my head)
What people need to be flummoxed by is Your report. Then they need to transcribe that realization of Govt( military) fraud to all aspects under their pervue.
*If they'll bake the books wholesale here- when massive numbers of lives and futures are at stake??
I’m just trying to provide an explanation for your expressed puzzlement at the lack of interest and inability to comprehend the implications of your discovery. I suppose what I meant is that your analysis seemingly* undermines the Renz disclosure in the minds of those that thought it was definitive proof of massive harm and coverup. Although there is enough of a mosaic of evidence (DMED notwithstanding) for us all to know these things to be true, it was thought that the DMED disclosure was the smoking gun. Renz even stressed that we had caught them red handed. Learning that the data itself is so compromised that it is impossible to derive the conclusions that Renz initially promised is a hard pill to swallow, so it fails to garner the same animus of the original scandal. That is why more outrage hasn’t manifested.
That's a pretty circuitous tale to express why people shouldn't continue to update their priors about a complex story as it unfolds.
It is an absurd expectation that people should take verbal cues to form "common knowledge" to be settled immediately and without update. Your thoughts here seem to treat people like sheep. I think there are more of them who are not who can resteer the herd.
One way or another, there is a ticking clock, and we know where the bomb is. The smoking gun isn't all that important while we're working to defuse the bomb.
At the risk of splitting hairs, my explanation of the psychology that is compelling people to overlook your analysis is not an endorsement or justification of that way of thinking. I agree with you that people should be able to update their priors and integrate your analysis, but the fact remains that they aren’t yet on the whole doing so. Even prominent, capable thinkers in the movement are still running with the original Renz disclosure. I don’t get why you’re taking issue with my explanation. What I’m expressing here is pretty basic (albeit unfortunate) human psychology, especially amongst people who have been grieved and traumatized by the tyrannical nightmare to which we have all been subjected. I guess I’m just surprised at your lack of understanding of it. What is so difficult to understand? People so wanted the original DMED whistleblower story to be true that they are having a hard time admitting that it isn’t the slam dunk they thought it was, even if you are instead presenting us with a drawn foul and two made free throws. Slam dunks make the highlight reel, even if made free throws down the stretch will win the game.
"the fact remains that they aren’t yet on the whole doing so"
All we need is for a few leaders and lawyers to do so. We're not talking about reversing all of mass psychosis here.
"that it isn’t the slam dunk they thought it was, even if you are instead presenting us with a drawn foul and two made free throws."
1. It's an identifiable database.
2. It's used by the CDC.
3. It's a matter of national security.
4. The changes are irrefutable.
5. This could open the door to finding out if unlawful orders were issued to the military. If that is the case, those orders need not be followed, and this could lead to the removal of a top level general or even the sitting president.
This is a dunk over Michael Jordan. What is your goal, here?
Jarrod’s explanation makes sense to me. We’re in a world where massive data manipulation is the norm. Funny numbers and bullshit is the norm. Not caring that your argument is built on funny numbers and bullshit is the norm. We have a bigger problem than one fake data set.
I’m wondering if there is maybe a way to look at DEERS data and somehow correlate data from that with all cause mortality year over year just based on enrollment and release from the Tricare Defense Enrollment Eligibility Report System that is the gatekeeper of all things medical and military. There has to be a way that data could show something I would think. As a pharmacist I’ve always had to deal with DEERS to deal with anyone on Tricare.
And that's in significant part how the election fraud battle was lost - going after what looked like fat and juicy targets, which in the end proved to be false or very well defended. In the meanwhile time and credibility are squandered and the public loses interest.
Can it be purposeful misdirection from the adversary?
Well, it has to be doesn’t it? It’s psyop, misdirection, manipulation of the opposition.
Years ago I listened to an audio of a talk John Brennan gave to the Notre Dame Law club in Chicago. In it he detailed the standard government hiring process he’d gone through and it was no Borking by a long shot. Rather, he was upfront about being a Marxist and urged the young law students to be the same, because (as he said to raucous knowing laughter) “they think because you’re honest about your politics that it disarms you.” Hahaha. Sure. Trump wasn’t ever playing 3D chess like his acolytes imagined, more like Parcheesi. Nah, the Marxist Left, they’re the real masters of misdirection. Legions of lawyers watching Amber and Johnny.
“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.” Frank Baum anticipated Orwell by decades.
"A normal person deprived of privilege or high position will go about finding and performing some work which will earn him a living; but pathocrats never possessed any solid practical talent, and the time frame of their rule eliminates any residual possibilities of adapting to the demands of normal work. If the laws of normal man were to be reinstated, they and theirs could be subjected to judgment, including a moralizing interpretation of their psychological deviations; they would be threatened by a loss of freedom and life, not merely a loss of position and privilege. Since they are incapable of this kind of sacrifice, the survival of a system which is the best for them becomes a moral imperative. Such a threat must be battled by means of any and all psychological and political cunning implemented with a lack of scruples with regard to those other “inferior quality” people that can be shocking in its depravity."
May 19, 2022·edited May 19, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Glad to be of service as a middleman. Will take 10% commission on the brownie points. The rest goes to Michael McConkey whose substack I quoted: https://thecirculationofelites.substack.com/
Just a few Kunlangeta in key positions can turn the whole organization pathocratic under the right conditions. One of the most important of those conditions is the breakdown of normalcy, when people no longer can rely on their healthy intuitions to recognize and isolate the Kunlangeta.
Reading Kennedy's book leaves little doubt that people like Fauci are sociopathic. If not clinically, then at least functionally (it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...) And then a combination of insane ideologies (aka "wokeness") and the virus scare created the right conditions for people like him to "shine" and turn the large chunks of government and society into a pathocracy.
It IS brilliant. Imagine telling someone thirty years ago that in the near future, a person who likes to pretend to be a dog for sexual gratification would hold an appointee position at the EPA? Or that a man who calls himself a woman would be the Surgeon General? Let alone that the titular head of NIH would help push the entire globe into their houses for almost two years? It would’ve seemed more reasonable to claim that the senate would hold UFO hearings. Oh right. Well that’s why no one gives a damn about aliens. Unless they landed in my yard and offered me cookies and said, “It actually is a cookbook” besides, what could they do that’s more unbelievable than the past two years?
About twelve years ago, after reading "The Professor and the Madman" I tried to introduce the descriptive term "Bimbocrat" into the lexicon, after my cousin's story of being "Pursued by the Bimbocracy."
Sadly, little traction so far.
I looked at the initial reports of the DMED corruption and thought that they implied that the US could not field a competent combat formation. This was the real issue with the aircraft carrier captain asking for help when his crew was covid-decimated- he was "giving comfort to the enemy" by revealing that his command was not combat capable.
I still suffer a little cognitive dissonance when I consider that neither the US armed forces or the CCP (Shanghai lockdown!) instituted a little prophylactic ivermectin. If it worked in Uttar Pradesh...
Yeah, when I saw the initial report, I thought, damn, we finally got them. The increase is so extreme. But yeah, as Matt pointed out, that data is not really in proportion to anything else.
“no, you don’t understand, the DMED database itself is so hopelessly manipulated that it’s all fake..."
I think that if Matthew would have hammered this bullet point, it would resonate more.
Because it locks in on the larger issue: Corruption within data sets.
The magic of "Safe and Effective" is even though it is a lie, it is simple and it has a hook like an marketing slogan, and it is relentlessly regurgitated.
Part of the problem of this whole mess from the onset has been the great gulf between the scientists and data crunchers and even savvy plebes trying to discern truth.
Thank you for illuminating the "National Security" aspect of this.
It seems we have little to no "National Security" in many ways beyond this issue and this is entirely by design.
Let us remind everyone that "National Security" is job #1 of the government, and without "National Security" we don't have ANYTHING!
That is right, no LGBT, CRT, Bill of Rights, Social Security, White Supremacy, Black Lives Matter, Indy 500, Super Bowl, Rule of Law (not meant to be funny), Donald J Trump, Joseph "Xi" Biden, Republicans (we don't have them anyway), Super Lotto, Tampons in the Mens Room, and this list is for starters.
So, this and any and all "National Security" issues should be of premier importance to any and all groups in America, no matter your race, gender, skin color, political persuasion, economic class, mental class, age, sex, religion, background, and so forth.
If there is ONE issue we should be able to come together as a nation this is it.
Who, actually caring about national security, would even press his soldiers to take experimental products... (even if that has gone one for a while, according to "A Midwestern Doctor").
OTOH, our beloved Klaus predicted that in 2030, the USA will no longer be the big world power.
Perhaps learning Chinese now can make you ahead in the game later.
You can’t re-index your way into something that is essentially orderly. You can kill your database that way, but that is why you backup before you re-index. So this is a clear indication of fraud, because there is no other way to make this happen. Working with fraudulent data is a waste of time and money. Pointing out that it is fraudulent is priceless.
The answer is simple: They committed an act of fraud to hide the fact that their mandate was killing people. This would be murder, which is a capital offense in this country, except that it is actually an act of war. The enemy is the government, and they are at war with the people who have been attempting to stop their criminal acts through the election process. There is criminal intent to injure or kill. The sooner we face this, the sooner it ends.
But the problem is that we're all overwhelmed already, and the authorities aren't listening; in fact for the most part they're ignoring those of us who understand that there's deception everywhere. So we all converse with each other and their strategy is to ignore us, and to put us into categories so we can be managed.
Because, you see, we're all just "conspiracy theorists." So everyone has a handle on that logical category: conspiracy theorist. If you hear something that isn't on the news, then just take it and put it in that ready-made category: conspiracy theory. There. You're done. No thinking necessary!
Or, one could simply put it into the category of "baseless." That was easy.
All of this is probably (I'm 99% sure) deliberate: these categories of understanding (Kant, anyone?) are created for us so that we understand nothing.
The solution is basic but powerful logic. Yes, that sounds simple but my thesis that we can see but don't understand we can see: we've been deliberately conditioned not to see. But seeing with the eyes of logic opens new worlds for us. And it really is simple.
I'll have much more to say on this and will break it all down.
"I assumed that the information would propagate through our network and would be cause (for those of us who want to see the experimental mass injection campaign stopped) to make a ton of noise. But when I came up for air, I found that wasn't happening, and I'm truly baffled."
It's a head scratcher and a heartbreak to drop life altering truth bombs and feel as if the greatest impact has been exhausting your energy and resources. I never make guesses about why folks do anything but focus on what happens instead. This situation reflects a pattern that repeats in every activist space that has deep pocket, global PR and far flung resistance.
It won't make you feel any better about the results but you're in good company if you consider Edward Snowden leaked evidence of NSA's global spying and he's still living in exile as lying Clapper moves to a cushy media career and Julian Assange still in London's GITMO facing extradition for exposing war crimes despite the fundamental threat to free press and evidence of CIA plot to assassinate him verified in a Spanish Court. You're on your own to decide what lessons to draw from those cases but it's clear incontrovertible evidence isn't gam eover.
"I posit that (1) people who look at the numbers side-by-side pretty much always get it, and (2) people who do not look at the numbers side-by-side sometimes still get it and sometimes don't."
Probably safe to say my mathematically challenged brain is closer to average folks than yours. What most of us see turns blurry the instant we are faced with a spreadsheet. Ratios that leap out intuitively for you are factors of intimidation for us if they aren't instantly clear.
It's why Naomi's 1000% sticks like glue once it lands; the number and concept are easy to remember and visualize. Better still they reinforce core belief established by enough other facts it feels right. We saw this in early gmo reporting that highlighted terminator seeds which were mostly distraction and caught fire like the 1000% while the lie of FDA approval is still unassailed.
"An ounce of facade is worth a pound of substance" applies to most information for most people. Look at how many doctors believe they are well informed about COVID jabs because they can cite abstract summaries and read New York Times, Guardian, Bloomberg, WaPo etc.
To a practical suggestion from the numeric phobic peanut gallery. The chart needs to be way bigger it's impossible to see the numbers in the video even at full screen so when the potentially aha moment is lost for folks who might see.
The whole story is the two blow up boxes and they need to be the focus. Folks good with memes & tag lines asking how you identify Enron accounting and folks cooking the books, like where's Waldo find the fraud but it needs a viral hook. Answers are over my pay grade, at best all you get are questions, observations & hugs. <3
May 18, 2022·edited May 18, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Pamela, I second everything you say, and am glad you could say it better and first. :)
Yes, the two pink boxes is where the action is.
Mathew, the folks who put together the Covid Tricks video should put together a DMED Tricks video per Philipat's outline, which is still my understanding of what DoD probably did. It needs to be broken down that far, with visuals, using small sample numbers that are easy to grasp, as in how survivorship bias was explained using the examples of the two swim coaches...
Gato and Couey are also very good at finding simple analogies that do not mislead.
Mathew, thank you for explaining this so clearly. I will send to my reps in Congress, however, living in California, I don't see that being of much help. I have written to all of them before. Both Senators Feinstein and Padilla will respond by thanking me for supporting the very thing about which I wrote asking them to vote Nay. Linda Sanchez does not even acknowledge that she has received anything. However, I have to try. As your opening quote intimates, silence is not an option, and gives a wink to those who are complicit in the deception.
Just an FYI, I was not able to send any links to the Senators. I think this is a recent change. I received a message that the message cannot be processed and indicated that hyperlinks are not allowed, nor are certain special characters. So, I composed my message with information that you have evidence of data manipulation in DMED that deserves attention, with information about how to access your Rounding The Earth Newsletter, with specific instructions as to the spelling of your first name.
Hi Mr. Crawford. I listened to you an your recent interview with Dr. Syed Haider. I like how you say you "try on different beliefs." This is better than the subconscious (SC) process most people do all their lives, denying what doesn't fit their preconceived notions.
So, while I would LIKE to ease you into the following, this is in writing & that would take too long. We KNOW that the manufacturers have paid for & gotten exemptions from the harms being caused. We leave ALL decision-making in the hands of those they pay.
So; we have to wait for them to voluntarily change that arrangement? Or is there some legal, non-violent way to get this stopped whether they want to or not? (As you said, there's too much capture).
It's the second thing (Yay!). However, if we ARE going to make this change against the will of those in power, we have to get MASS public support on our side BEFORE they know what we're doing. We can both think of reasons for that.
So, care to discuss strategies for doing this?
The public & even people who think they know the jabs are harmful (like Steve Kirsch) may jump on board with a movement that sounds right & has some support. As this plea to "inform others" shows though, this is what everyone is waiting for Everyone ELSE to do first.
From there we get more & can pressure a LOT of alt media sites, gurus & their followers into joining because they'd lose all face if they didn't.
James Corbett himself is an excellent example of a following that can push this effort into success. If we get to a point where he verbally supports it, then his followers lose their excuses for not. He's got millions. I've got ideas.
The question that needs to be asked (by someone good like Sen. Ron Johnson or an attorney for the Navy Seals) is this: “If the commander-in-chief issued an order to falsify the DMED database, would that be a *lawful* order?”
It would be a trap question for the administration, and here’s why: They *could* contend that the Commander-in-Chief DOES have the right to conceal a potential weakness of the US military from an adversary. In a time of potential conflict, they could argue that it would be irresponsible to publish a broad-based weakness (vaccine injury) affecting (perhaps) thousands of US military personnel.
On the other hand, the administration might contend that falsifying the DMED data would be an *unlawful* order. If they do, it could lead to whistleblowers coming forward to admit they were ordered to falsify the data. In other words, such an order could have been issued by someone below the C-i-C. (Your work certainly suggests that it was.) Then, it might be possible to work up the chain of command to the true source (which might be *very* high up indeed).
I think the key is simply to *ask the question*. Either answer (yes or no) would open MANY doors.
I will add that if the administration makes an argument that the DMED *IS* legally subject to falsification by the C-i-C due to “national security interests,” it would open the door to other very pointed questions. For example, would it be legal for the C-i-C order that “vaccine injury deaths be classified as deaths by suicide*? 🤔
So to summarize: the data is faked, but we don't know how, which leaves a vacuum for people to make up ideas about how it was faked, and to be manipulated to make those who question the false vaccines look like they don't know what they are talking about?
When you refresh the page the hearts that didn't seem to work appear, they were counted but not shown. More often it happens to me when it gets into the nested threads but refresh always works for <3 update.
If false / bad data is being released, and promoted, it could very well be a tactic to make "noisy" the claims and act as a red herring any future claims. The public and politicians will then just think it is misinformation, even though the truth is among the noise.
That is part of my worry, and part of why I'm making noise myself now. This story needs to not get "Brook Jackson'ed" and held back until after it's useless.
I know that at least one investigative act took place weeks after I made my discovery that was incorrectly worded with respect to a company that handles the database.
Claude Shannon kind of noise interfering with information I presume. Seems like much of our history as a nation, at least what is/was taught, fits into that category. What you are saying is, if I read it correctly, is in that vein.
My only thought is to reach out to Pam Popper who works closely with Tom Renz and is the head of MAFA. My experience with her is that she is always open to new data, and I would be surprised (and very disappointed!) if she ignored your interpretation. She wants to get it right, and has repeatedly stated that she wants everything vetted to avoid the dissemination into and adoption of bad information in our camp. pampopper@msn.com, or call Wellness Forum Health at 614-841-7700.
Mathew – Perhaps this has already been answered, but have you taken steps to archive the critical trade industry data snapshots in some neutral, verified manner so that they cannot simply be memory-holed by powerful interests? Or do they perhaps already exist in a form that could not be disappeared?
Thank you so much for doing this, your work is invaluable. I'm not knees deep in the data and can't keep up with all of the statistics / maths / bio stuff involved so have just a peripheral understanding of what's happening here - but when I read your posts I come away feeling more educated.
I am also alarmed by certain vaccine skeptics being sloppy with their criticisms - It can end up giving ammo to those who want to write off skepticism of the Covid vaccines as "misinformation, dangerous, etc". It wouldn't surprise me if some fake memes / info are dropped into the ecosystem like with the Pfizer drops to cloud the reality of what's happening.
What you have discovered is massively important, but I think the reason it has failed to make waves is because it’s a more nuanced point that undermines the initial Renz disclosure. The Renz disclosure captured the imagination of those fighting for Covid truth because it was more in line with the cover-up tactics we’ve come to expect from the Covid perpetrators. As in “there were massive increases in the DMED data sets after the Covid vaccine, and when this was publicly disclosed, they attempted to hide it by retroactively manipulating the data pre-vaccine to make the rise in injury disappear.” This is a simple, easy to comprehend story and captured the imagination of the community. Once something sticks, it’s hard to course correct to a more accurate account of events. It’s unfortunate, but it plays a lot better than “no, you don’t understand, the DMED database itself is so hopelessly manipulated that it’s all fake. It’s fakeness is evidence in itself that something is vastly wrong and a huge deal as it renders our ability to accurately ascertain safety signals impossible, but we really can’t reach any definitive conclusions about the initial disclosure that captured all your imaginations until we get the real data.”
"I think the reason it has failed to make waves is because it’s a more nuanced point that undermines the initial Renz disclosure."
This is frustrating to read.
What I found does not undermine what Renz and the whistleblowers presented. They had a short shot clock and they're not data experts. They showed as best as they could read what they saw, not knowing the data was twice corrupted. That's not their fault, though a [good] professional data expert would have had the data sense to detect problems.
Also, this is not "nuanced" in any way, shape, or form. This is like a bomb in the building. It threatens everything.
Mathew,that was kind of you- however a 'good professional ' report does indeed undercut the presumed accurate and outrage inducing Renz report. Thry meant well,but it's a bit of crow to swallow when you get shown what you believed to be accurate was not.
( im hoping that made the sense written as it did in my head)
What people need to be flummoxed by is Your report. Then they need to transcribe that realization of Govt( military) fraud to all aspects under their pervue.
*If they'll bake the books wholesale here- when massive numbers of lives and futures are at stake??
WHAT WONT THEY DO???
I’m just trying to provide an explanation for your expressed puzzlement at the lack of interest and inability to comprehend the implications of your discovery. I suppose what I meant is that your analysis seemingly* undermines the Renz disclosure in the minds of those that thought it was definitive proof of massive harm and coverup. Although there is enough of a mosaic of evidence (DMED notwithstanding) for us all to know these things to be true, it was thought that the DMED disclosure was the smoking gun. Renz even stressed that we had caught them red handed. Learning that the data itself is so compromised that it is impossible to derive the conclusions that Renz initially promised is a hard pill to swallow, so it fails to garner the same animus of the original scandal. That is why more outrage hasn’t manifested.
That's a pretty circuitous tale to express why people shouldn't continue to update their priors about a complex story as it unfolds.
It is an absurd expectation that people should take verbal cues to form "common knowledge" to be settled immediately and without update. Your thoughts here seem to treat people like sheep. I think there are more of them who are not who can resteer the herd.
One way or another, there is a ticking clock, and we know where the bomb is. The smoking gun isn't all that important while we're working to defuse the bomb.
At the risk of splitting hairs, my explanation of the psychology that is compelling people to overlook your analysis is not an endorsement or justification of that way of thinking. I agree with you that people should be able to update their priors and integrate your analysis, but the fact remains that they aren’t yet on the whole doing so. Even prominent, capable thinkers in the movement are still running with the original Renz disclosure. I don’t get why you’re taking issue with my explanation. What I’m expressing here is pretty basic (albeit unfortunate) human psychology, especially amongst people who have been grieved and traumatized by the tyrannical nightmare to which we have all been subjected. I guess I’m just surprised at your lack of understanding of it. What is so difficult to understand? People so wanted the original DMED whistleblower story to be true that they are having a hard time admitting that it isn’t the slam dunk they thought it was, even if you are instead presenting us with a drawn foul and two made free throws. Slam dunks make the highlight reel, even if made free throws down the stretch will win the game.
"the fact remains that they aren’t yet on the whole doing so"
All we need is for a few leaders and lawyers to do so. We're not talking about reversing all of mass psychosis here.
"that it isn’t the slam dunk they thought it was, even if you are instead presenting us with a drawn foul and two made free throws."
1. It's an identifiable database.
2. It's used by the CDC.
3. It's a matter of national security.
4. The changes are irrefutable.
5. This could open the door to finding out if unlawful orders were issued to the military. If that is the case, those orders need not be followed, and this could lead to the removal of a top level general or even the sitting president.
This is a dunk over Michael Jordan. What is your goal, here?
Jarrod’s explanation makes sense to me. We’re in a world where massive data manipulation is the norm. Funny numbers and bullshit is the norm. Not caring that your argument is built on funny numbers and bullshit is the norm. We have a bigger problem than one fake data set.
Maybe because your explanations and writing style are arcane as fuck. Just a thought.
It is mind boggling that it’s worse than we ever imagined.
I’m wondering if there is maybe a way to look at DEERS data and somehow correlate data from that with all cause mortality year over year just based on enrollment and release from the Tricare Defense Enrollment Eligibility Report System that is the gatekeeper of all things medical and military. There has to be a way that data could show something I would think. As a pharmacist I’ve always had to deal with DEERS to deal with anyone on Tricare.
And that's in significant part how the election fraud battle was lost - going after what looked like fat and juicy targets, which in the end proved to be false or very well defended. In the meanwhile time and credibility are squandered and the public loses interest.
Can it be purposeful misdirection from the adversary?
Well, it has to be doesn’t it? It’s psyop, misdirection, manipulation of the opposition.
Years ago I listened to an audio of a talk John Brennan gave to the Notre Dame Law club in Chicago. In it he detailed the standard government hiring process he’d gone through and it was no Borking by a long shot. Rather, he was upfront about being a Marxist and urged the young law students to be the same, because (as he said to raucous knowing laughter) “they think because you’re honest about your politics that it disarms you.” Hahaha. Sure. Trump wasn’t ever playing 3D chess like his acolytes imagined, more like Parcheesi. Nah, the Marxist Left, they’re the real masters of misdirection. Legions of lawyers watching Amber and Johnny.
“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.” Frank Baum anticipated Orwell by decades.
The real Marxist left is against this as well. This is the work of the fake fascist left - and right for that matter.
>This is an institutional cancer like no other.
A similar quote from Andrzej Lobaczewski [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ponerology] (brought down here https://thecirculationofelites.substack.com/p/anarcho-tyranny-and-the-psychorium):
"A normal person deprived of privilege or high position will go about finding and performing some work which will earn him a living; but pathocrats never possessed any solid practical talent, and the time frame of their rule eliminates any residual possibilities of adapting to the demands of normal work. If the laws of normal man were to be reinstated, they and theirs could be subjected to judgment, including a moralizing interpretation of their psychological deviations; they would be threatened by a loss of freedom and life, not merely a loss of position and privilege. Since they are incapable of this kind of sacrifice, the survival of a system which is the best for them becomes a moral imperative. Such a threat must be battled by means of any and all psychological and political cunning implemented with a lack of scruples with regard to those other “inferior quality” people that can be shocking in its depravity."
Yes! I learned a new word, and it's an important one.
It is also relevant to some upcoming writings. Thank you.
Glad to be of service as a middleman. Will take 10% commission on the brownie points. The rest goes to Michael McConkey whose substack I quoted: https://thecirculationofelites.substack.com/
Yes!
"Pathocrat"
>I think that's the FDA Leadership
Just a few Kunlangeta in key positions can turn the whole organization pathocratic under the right conditions. One of the most important of those conditions is the breakdown of normalcy, when people no longer can rely on their healthy intuitions to recognize and isolate the Kunlangeta.
Reading Kennedy's book leaves little doubt that people like Fauci are sociopathic. If not clinically, then at least functionally (it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...) And then a combination of insane ideologies (aka "wokeness") and the virus scare created the right conditions for people like him to "shine" and turn the large chunks of government and society into a pathocracy.
It IS brilliant. Imagine telling someone thirty years ago that in the near future, a person who likes to pretend to be a dog for sexual gratification would hold an appointee position at the EPA? Or that a man who calls himself a woman would be the Surgeon General? Let alone that the titular head of NIH would help push the entire globe into their houses for almost two years? It would’ve seemed more reasonable to claim that the senate would hold UFO hearings. Oh right. Well that’s why no one gives a damn about aliens. Unless they landed in my yard and offered me cookies and said, “It actually is a cookbook” besides, what could they do that’s more unbelievable than the past two years?
What a term. I like it
About twelve years ago, after reading "The Professor and the Madman" I tried to introduce the descriptive term "Bimbocrat" into the lexicon, after my cousin's story of being "Pursued by the Bimbocracy."
Sadly, little traction so far.
I looked at the initial reports of the DMED corruption and thought that they implied that the US could not field a competent combat formation. This was the real issue with the aircraft carrier captain asking for help when his crew was covid-decimated- he was "giving comfort to the enemy" by revealing that his command was not combat capable.
I still suffer a little cognitive dissonance when I consider that neither the US armed forces or the CCP (Shanghai lockdown!) instituted a little prophylactic ivermectin. If it worked in Uttar Pradesh...
Now THAT is a very interesting idea....screen for narcissism....
You put that very well, thank you.
Yeah, when I saw the initial report, I thought, damn, we finally got them. The increase is so extreme. But yeah, as Matt pointed out, that data is not really in proportion to anything else.
“no, you don’t understand, the DMED database itself is so hopelessly manipulated that it’s all fake..."
I think that if Matthew would have hammered this bullet point, it would resonate more.
Because it locks in on the larger issue: Corruption within data sets.
The magic of "Safe and Effective" is even though it is a lie, it is simple and it has a hook like an marketing slogan, and it is relentlessly regurgitated.
Part of the problem of this whole mess from the onset has been the great gulf between the scientists and data crunchers and even savvy plebes trying to discern truth.
This!
Thank you for illuminating the "National Security" aspect of this.
It seems we have little to no "National Security" in many ways beyond this issue and this is entirely by design.
Let us remind everyone that "National Security" is job #1 of the government, and without "National Security" we don't have ANYTHING!
That is right, no LGBT, CRT, Bill of Rights, Social Security, White Supremacy, Black Lives Matter, Indy 500, Super Bowl, Rule of Law (not meant to be funny), Donald J Trump, Joseph "Xi" Biden, Republicans (we don't have them anyway), Super Lotto, Tampons in the Mens Room, and this list is for starters.
So, this and any and all "National Security" issues should be of premier importance to any and all groups in America, no matter your race, gender, skin color, political persuasion, economic class, mental class, age, sex, religion, background, and so forth.
If there is ONE issue we should be able to come together as a nation this is it.
This is not "Rocket Science," people!
Who, actually caring about national security, would even press his soldiers to take experimental products... (even if that has gone one for a while, according to "A Midwestern Doctor").
OTOH, our beloved Klaus predicted that in 2030, the USA will no longer be the big world power.
Perhaps learning Chinese now can make you ahead in the game later.
You can’t re-index your way into something that is essentially orderly. You can kill your database that way, but that is why you backup before you re-index. So this is a clear indication of fraud, because there is no other way to make this happen. Working with fraudulent data is a waste of time and money. Pointing out that it is fraudulent is priceless.
The answer is simple: They committed an act of fraud to hide the fact that their mandate was killing people. This would be murder, which is a capital offense in this country, except that it is actually an act of war. The enemy is the government, and they are at war with the people who have been attempting to stop their criminal acts through the election process. There is criminal intent to injure or kill. The sooner we face this, the sooner it ends.
But the problem is that we're all overwhelmed already, and the authorities aren't listening; in fact for the most part they're ignoring those of us who understand that there's deception everywhere. So we all converse with each other and their strategy is to ignore us, and to put us into categories so we can be managed.
Because, you see, we're all just "conspiracy theorists." So everyone has a handle on that logical category: conspiracy theorist. If you hear something that isn't on the news, then just take it and put it in that ready-made category: conspiracy theory. There. You're done. No thinking necessary!
Or, one could simply put it into the category of "baseless." That was easy.
All of this is probably (I'm 99% sure) deliberate: these categories of understanding (Kant, anyone?) are created for us so that we understand nothing.
The solution is basic but powerful logic. Yes, that sounds simple but my thesis that we can see but don't understand we can see: we've been deliberately conditioned not to see. But seeing with the eyes of logic opens new worlds for us. And it really is simple.
I'll have much more to say on this and will break it all down.
"I assumed that the information would propagate through our network and would be cause (for those of us who want to see the experimental mass injection campaign stopped) to make a ton of noise. But when I came up for air, I found that wasn't happening, and I'm truly baffled."
It's a head scratcher and a heartbreak to drop life altering truth bombs and feel as if the greatest impact has been exhausting your energy and resources. I never make guesses about why folks do anything but focus on what happens instead. This situation reflects a pattern that repeats in every activist space that has deep pocket, global PR and far flung resistance.
It won't make you feel any better about the results but you're in good company if you consider Edward Snowden leaked evidence of NSA's global spying and he's still living in exile as lying Clapper moves to a cushy media career and Julian Assange still in London's GITMO facing extradition for exposing war crimes despite the fundamental threat to free press and evidence of CIA plot to assassinate him verified in a Spanish Court. You're on your own to decide what lessons to draw from those cases but it's clear incontrovertible evidence isn't gam eover.
"I posit that (1) people who look at the numbers side-by-side pretty much always get it, and (2) people who do not look at the numbers side-by-side sometimes still get it and sometimes don't."
Probably safe to say my mathematically challenged brain is closer to average folks than yours. What most of us see turns blurry the instant we are faced with a spreadsheet. Ratios that leap out intuitively for you are factors of intimidation for us if they aren't instantly clear.
It's why Naomi's 1000% sticks like glue once it lands; the number and concept are easy to remember and visualize. Better still they reinforce core belief established by enough other facts it feels right. We saw this in early gmo reporting that highlighted terminator seeds which were mostly distraction and caught fire like the 1000% while the lie of FDA approval is still unassailed.
"An ounce of facade is worth a pound of substance" applies to most information for most people. Look at how many doctors believe they are well informed about COVID jabs because they can cite abstract summaries and read New York Times, Guardian, Bloomberg, WaPo etc.
To a practical suggestion from the numeric phobic peanut gallery. The chart needs to be way bigger it's impossible to see the numbers in the video even at full screen so when the potentially aha moment is lost for folks who might see.
The whole story is the two blow up boxes and they need to be the focus. Folks good with memes & tag lines asking how you identify Enron accounting and folks cooking the books, like where's Waldo find the fraud but it needs a viral hook. Answers are over my pay grade, at best all you get are questions, observations & hugs. <3
Pamela, I second everything you say, and am glad you could say it better and first. :)
Yes, the two pink boxes is where the action is.
Mathew, the folks who put together the Covid Tricks video should put together a DMED Tricks video per Philipat's outline, which is still my understanding of what DoD probably did. It needs to be broken down that far, with visuals, using small sample numbers that are easy to grasp, as in how survivorship bias was explained using the examples of the two swim coaches...
Gato and Couey are also very good at finding simple analogies that do not mislead.
I don't know of those "Covid Tricks" video.
Should have said "Covid Vaccine Tricks"; not sure who creates these videos. In the UK?
https://inproportion2.talkigy.com/covid_vaccine_tricks_2022-01.html
Mathew, thank you for explaining this so clearly. I will send to my reps in Congress, however, living in California, I don't see that being of much help. I have written to all of them before. Both Senators Feinstein and Padilla will respond by thanking me for supporting the very thing about which I wrote asking them to vote Nay. Linda Sanchez does not even acknowledge that she has received anything. However, I have to try. As your opening quote intimates, silence is not an option, and gives a wink to those who are complicit in the deception.
Just an FYI, I was not able to send any links to the Senators. I think this is a recent change. I received a message that the message cannot be processed and indicated that hyperlinks are not allowed, nor are certain special characters. So, I composed my message with information that you have evidence of data manipulation in DMED that deserves attention, with information about how to access your Rounding The Earth Newsletter, with specific instructions as to the spelling of your first name.
Thank you.
All I get in Florida is form letters
Did you contact and share with Naomi Wolf and Steve Bannon?
1. I went to bed.
2. I woke up to a phone call from Naomi. We had a nice chat.
Hi Mr. Crawford. I listened to you an your recent interview with Dr. Syed Haider. I like how you say you "try on different beliefs." This is better than the subconscious (SC) process most people do all their lives, denying what doesn't fit their preconceived notions.
So, while I would LIKE to ease you into the following, this is in writing & that would take too long. We KNOW that the manufacturers have paid for & gotten exemptions from the harms being caused. We leave ALL decision-making in the hands of those they pay.
So; we have to wait for them to voluntarily change that arrangement? Or is there some legal, non-violent way to get this stopped whether they want to or not? (As you said, there's too much capture).
It's the second thing (Yay!). However, if we ARE going to make this change against the will of those in power, we have to get MASS public support on our side BEFORE they know what we're doing. We can both think of reasons for that.
So, care to discuss strategies for doing this?
The public & even people who think they know the jabs are harmful (like Steve Kirsch) may jump on board with a movement that sounds right & has some support. As this plea to "inform others" shows though, this is what everyone is waiting for Everyone ELSE to do first.
From there we get more & can pressure a LOT of alt media sites, gurus & their followers into joining because they'd lose all face if they didn't.
It's getting is started that's The Problem. I need One Other Person on board before the others will. That First Other Person https://www.corbettreport.com/the-bystander-effect-solutionswatch-video/ is The First Key, then the others go along.
James Corbett himself is an excellent example of a following that can push this effort into success. If we get to a point where he verbally supports it, then his followers lose their excuses for not. He's got millions. I've got ideas.
I need support.
Can WE chat?
Thank you, Mathew for your thorough review of what there is.
I generally don’t feature numbers of casualties from “vaccination” because as you’ll know, I major on the total deceit of it all.
The question that needs to be asked (by someone good like Sen. Ron Johnson or an attorney for the Navy Seals) is this: “If the commander-in-chief issued an order to falsify the DMED database, would that be a *lawful* order?”
It would be a trap question for the administration, and here’s why: They *could* contend that the Commander-in-Chief DOES have the right to conceal a potential weakness of the US military from an adversary. In a time of potential conflict, they could argue that it would be irresponsible to publish a broad-based weakness (vaccine injury) affecting (perhaps) thousands of US military personnel.
On the other hand, the administration might contend that falsifying the DMED data would be an *unlawful* order. If they do, it could lead to whistleblowers coming forward to admit they were ordered to falsify the data. In other words, such an order could have been issued by someone below the C-i-C. (Your work certainly suggests that it was.) Then, it might be possible to work up the chain of command to the true source (which might be *very* high up indeed).
I think the key is simply to *ask the question*. Either answer (yes or no) would open MANY doors.
I will add that if the administration makes an argument that the DMED *IS* legally subject to falsification by the C-i-C due to “national security interests,” it would open the door to other very pointed questions. For example, would it be legal for the C-i-C order that “vaccine injury deaths be classified as deaths by suicide*? 🤔
So to summarize: the data is faked, but we don't know how, which leaves a vacuum for people to make up ideas about how it was faked, and to be manipulated to make those who question the false vaccines look like they don't know what they are talking about?
" Something went wrong" when I tried to like. Will share this on my Gettr and try to share to Dr Wolf and Bannon.
When you refresh the page the hearts that didn't seem to work appear, they were counted but not shown. More often it happens to me when it gets into the nested threads but refresh always works for <3 update.
Yes. Happens to me too.
If false / bad data is being released, and promoted, it could very well be a tactic to make "noisy" the claims and act as a red herring any future claims. The public and politicians will then just think it is misinformation, even though the truth is among the noise.
That is part of my worry, and part of why I'm making noise myself now. This story needs to not get "Brook Jackson'ed" and held back until after it's useless.
I know that at least one investigative act took place weeks after I made my discovery that was incorrectly worded with respect to a company that handles the database.
Claude Shannon kind of noise interfering with information I presume. Seems like much of our history as a nation, at least what is/was taught, fits into that category. What you are saying is, if I read it correctly, is in that vein.
Glad Naomi called you! God bless and stay strong.
My only thought is to reach out to Pam Popper who works closely with Tom Renz and is the head of MAFA. My experience with her is that she is always open to new data, and I would be surprised (and very disappointed!) if she ignored your interpretation. She wants to get it right, and has repeatedly stated that she wants everything vetted to avoid the dissemination into and adoption of bad information in our camp. pampopper@msn.com, or call Wellness Forum Health at 614-841-7700.
Mathew – Perhaps this has already been answered, but have you taken steps to archive the critical trade industry data snapshots in some neutral, verified manner so that they cannot simply be memory-holed by powerful interests? Or do they perhaps already exist in a form that could not be disappeared?
They are in many hands and on the waybavk machine.