These two quotes from Mencken perfectly sum up the M.O. of the Left since the late 1800s right up to Sloppy Joe:
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed—and hence clamorous to be led to safety—by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it."
___________
Someone had asked me if I had heard what was going around about “vaccines” being sprayed onto fruits and vegetables. I said that mRNA is very fragile. Just being out at room temperature would mess it up. Stomach acid would totally destroy it. And any heat of cooking would do the same.
And for that matter, who has the money to be generating millions of tons of viral mRNA, much less doing all the work to get it encapsulated into the molecular delivery vehicles to get it where it’s supposed to go, shipping it everywhere, training people how to mix it with what, the allowable levels of pH, temperature, and mineral content, exactly how to spray it and how much of it and how often to spray it on the fruits and vegetables. And then to do this at least three times per week.
And those are just the logistics. That’s not even considering the liability involved.
Think of it like this. Remember the Coke ad campaign, “Have a Coke and a smile”?
So what if some Coke ad department said, “A lot of people suffer headaches. It’s pretty hard to be smiling when you have a headache, so why don’t we put a dose of aspirin into every 12 ounces of Coke?”
Would they EVER get away with it?
It could hurt or kill some people.
Coke executives would probably say, “Look, it’s not Coke’s responsibility to medicate people to feel better. The last time we tried that was when the product still contained cocaine. And just because we’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony, we’re not going to pay for subsidizing singing coaches. Let Disney do that.”
If the “vaccine” is considered a chemical substance, then they are adulterating food, like the Tylenol poisoner adulterated Tylenol with cyanide.
If it’s considered a medical treatment, then they will be liable for every adverse effect.
Grocery stores operate on a margin of about 2 or 3 percent. NONE of them is going to risk going out of business for spraying dangerous infective substances on their zucchini.
So, if neither logistics nor matters of liability support such an outlandish notion, then what’s the more likely reason for people to float a scheme like that?
So, here’s my guess of what’s probably behind that.
Since the end of the 1800s at least, what has been the principal MO of leftists to manipulate the public?
Fear.
If we don’t ban opium, then your wives and daughters are going to be raped by Chinese men berserk on opium.
If we don’t ban marijuana, then your wives and daughters are going to be raped by Mexican and black men berserk on weed.
If we don’t promote birth control and sterilization to get rid of the non-WASP human weeds choking our country your wives and your daughters will be subject to continuous criminal assault.
If we don’t sterilize and abort the Third World, the population bomb will use up all the food and water and minerals that we need.
If we don’t ban the atom bomb, you’ll all die in nuclear annihilation.
If we don’t ban fossil fuels, we’ll drop into another ice age.
If we don’t ban nuclear power, we’ll have meltdowns.
If we don’t ban Freon, we’ll die from cancer from UV radiating on coming through the hole in the ozone layer.
If we don’t ban fossil fuels, we’ll all burn up or drown because of global warming.
Same old shit for decades.
So here’s how the fear angle fits in with some other things:
I’m sure over the past year you’ve seen the stories about the very large number of food processing plants and livestock operations that have been taken out, the huge recalls and destruction of food on some pretext or other, the rash of hens not laying eggs that local farmers said was solved by not buying chicken feed from the large feed companies, whole countries banning or restricting the use of inorganic fertilizer (which is the only sort of fertilizer plants can use except for CO2, which a certain group of people seem hell bent of depleting from the atmosphere), reports of home gardening being banned, large tracts of farm land bought up and taken out of production, the descriptions of which in aggregate have been repeatedly described by the usual leftist media suspects as conspiracy theories.
So, with that in mind, let’s think of things in terms of objectives, reasons for those objectives, goals, procedures to implement those goals, and, finally, outcomes that arise from all those different kinds of previous, purposeful activities.
Sometimes, you know, like in embezzlement, espionage, and murders, we may not have any clue about the objectives, reasons for them, and goals, because all of that is hatched in someone’s mind and they usually don’t spread it around because
A. They don’t want their plan foiled before the final objectives are realized, whether by their mark getting away or by someone deliberately messing with their methods, and
B. They want to be able to get away with it.
So, very often someone has to notice enough occurrences with sufficiently similar characteristics happening with a frequency that appears inexplicable by chance but that could more reasonably be described as outcomes.
And not merely outcomes as effects of preceding causes, because there is NOTHING that happens in a contingent universe that is not the effect of one or more preceding causes; rather, outcomes of some deliberately engineered cause.
Then one can look for the means by which those outcomes were effected and ask if they had anything in common that was just too obvious or too frequently used to be explicable by chance.
For instance, consider this outcome: there are an unusual number of fires throughout a large metropolitan area, too many to be explained by chance.
If all the means used to start those fires involved some sort of accelerant, then it’s obvious the fires were probably outcomes of deliberate acts toward accomplishing specific goals directed toward achieving an overall objective that someone had reasons for designing.
Then one tries to intuit those goals in the service of the objectives and the reasons behind the objectives.
Some of that could be seen by anything those outcomes had in common.
Were all the fires confined to Free Will Baptist churches? Maybe they were set by militant Calvinists. Maybe they were set by a myopic Greenpeace bigot who thought those Baptist churches were trying to horn in on his whale-saving fundraising ploy.
Were the fires confined to Mormon, or Jehovahs Witnesses, or to Christian Science, or to Rosicrucian, or to Lanny Love’s Church of the Higher Vibrational Powers of the Kundalini Awakening? Or to any of those in aggregate? Maybe they were set by someone whose mom ran off with a door-to-door cultist.
Were all the fires confined to Protestant churches in general or to Catholic churches? Maybe they were being targeted by the FBI’s Domestic Extremism Squad.
Were the fires confined to synagogues or to mosques or to Hindu temples? Maybe they were targeted by Iran.
Were they all among religious organizations except for one in particular?
Were they against Ford or Chrysler or Tesla (though some of those fires had the same things in common) or Mercedes?
Were they only against dealerships selling cars powered by internal combustion engines?
Were they all against used car dealers? Or just used car dealers in one region of the city?
Were they against all car dealerships of all kinds, new or used, ICU or electric?
Or did the fires hit almost every imaginable type of “business” or organization, but never any residences of any kind?
Or did the locations of the fires have absolutely nothing in common except they weren’t “natural” locations?
Or did the fires have absolutely nothing in common except the use of an accelerant and a particular time period within which they occurred?
All of those things can suggest goals, objectives, and the reasons behind the objectives.
But what if there was a bizarrely unusual number of fires evenly spread out in a particular large metropolitan area, the scenes of the fires were ALL at completely different types of locations, there had been no severe lightning storms or beams from aircraft or space, and arson investigators could find no fire that seemed to have been deliberately set?
The chance of a very large number of fires (1/X, X being the total number of fires, say 100) occurring in that one large metropolitan area (figure 1/X, X being the total number of similarly sized metropolitan areas in the US, say 10) multiplied by the chance of them being evenly dispersed throughout the area (1/X, X being either the number of regions or the number of fires, 100) multiplied by the chance of them all being in completely different locales (1/X, X being the number of the different locales or the number of fires, 100) multiplied by the chance of them occurring on the same day (1/365) multiplied by the chances of them all randomly starting by ostensibly normal but different means (1/X, X being the total number of different means or the number of fires, 100) compared to the likelihood it was deliberately set up? It would be unbelievably unlikely the rash of fires was NOT a coordinated and deliberate act.
Why?
Two reasons:
1. Here’s a rough estimate of the elements of that fire scenario happening by chance: (1/100)^5 *1/365 = 1/365,000,000,000
2. The product of something deliberate is not by chance.
_____________
Anyway, so the ones on the left claiming that the idea that there is a concerted effort to target the food supply around the world are (ridiculously) saying this:
“Calculate the chances of each one of those things happening. Then multiply all those chances. That probability for ALL of those occurring is infinitesimal. So, to claim something THAT unlikely was a deliberate act, you guys have to be effing crazy conspiracy theorists!”
But what did they just do?
1. They affirmed that all those different things WERE nothing but random occurrences.
2. They denied that there were any deliberate actions to plan and execute those events.
3. The proof they offer that number 2 couldn’t be true is the likelihood of all that happening by chance.
4. They applied the likelihood of a concatenation of random events to a deliberate act.
5. By this they are claiming that something happening deliberately is controlled by the likelihood of its happening by chance.
6. So they are claiming that a deliberate act is even more unlikely than something happening by chance.
7. This ties in to their belief that the accidental nature of something in which they are involved absolves them of any responsibility when it goes wrong.
8. It also ties into their belief that the good intention behind a deliberate act of theirs absolves them of any responsibility for any bad consequences of that act.
9. It also ties into their belief that their good intention behind a deliberate act of theirs that turns to shit and harms others should be credited to them as though it had produced the opposite of the actual outcome.
10. But deliberate acts do not happen by chance; they happen by the willful application of effort toward the realization of an objective.
_________
So, back to what I think is the likeliest reason behind the idea going around about vaccines being sprayed on fruits and vegetables and the constant MO of the left: fear.
What are the possible ways of reducing what is available for people to eat?
Here are some.
1. Plant less food.
By limiting land available for farming.
By using inheritance taxes to break up family farms owned and operated expertly for generations.
By forcing them (to pay the taxes) to sell either to speculators, non-farmers like Bill Gates and the PRC, or giant multinational agricultural companies (the modern term for state-owned (communist) or state-controlled (fascist) collectives) the operations of which in any one country can be manipulated by the regulatory state of that country and the operations of which internationally can be manipulated by international regulatory agencies or giant investment companies that can dictate their operations by their dependence on finances or what those companies will or will not buy or allow to be sold to the various food industries they own or have major investments in.
2. Grow less food.
By restricting land use for “environmental” reasons.
By restricting water use for “environmental” reasons.
By restricting what types of crops may be grown for “environmental” reasons.
By restricting the use of inorganic fertilizers whether by law, by price, or by manipulating the companies that produce it,
By messing with animal feed formulations to impair growth or to reduce output (like the eggs).
By reducing the acreage of land devoted to growing food by the use of the regulatory state to grow non-food products or subsidies to grow nothing at all or to grow food but use it to produce ethanol for fuel for spurious “environmental” reasons.
3. Harvest less food.
By 1 & 2 above.
4. Make food much more expensive.
By 1-3 above.
By increasing fuel costs.
By EPA regulations and by other federal regulations controlling the design, sale, operation, use, and longevity of farm machinery and other equipment.
By the use of the regulatory state to increase financing costs for independent farm operators.
By encouraging “organic farms” that cost far more, produce much less and to reduce the total acreage available for more productive farming.
5. Reduce the availability of food.
By 1-4 above.
6. Restrict the types of food available.
By using such schemes as the “food pyramid,” ostensibly for reasons of health, but actually for industries the regulators want to support or for industries those who control the regulators want to help or harm for reasons having nothing to do with nutrition or health except in extremely sinister ways.
7. Restrict people from growing, producing, storing, and using their own food.
By local laws.
By zoning restrictions.
By preventing people to buy small plots of land outside cities for gardening.
8. Destroy food.
By destroying vast numbers of livestock on account of one or another type of microbe detected.
Something that was much less likely to happen among many separated small producers (think of it as the functional equivalent of operational quarantine),
By vast recalls and destruction of food products.
By mysterious destruction of herds of animals, chicken farms, meat packing plants, food processing plants, food distribution centers.
9. Make people averse to eating certain kinds of foods.
By claiming that fertilizers and pesticide residues will kill them,
By claiming that drinking milk from cows using BSH will cause prepubescent girls to go into puberty years earlier and grow huge tits (utterly untrue because mammalian quadruped growth hormones literally cannot dock with and activate human growth hormone receptors, but growth hormones in human milk CAN dock with and activate mammalian quadruped growth hormone receptors)
By claiming that antioxidants added to packaging can cause disease
By making people afraid to eat food with insect protein.
By making people afraid to eat gluten.
By making people afraid to eat red meat.
By making people afraid to eat any meat at all.
And, latest in the fear-mongering, fear of eating fresh fruits and vegetable because of “vaccines” being sprayed on them.
And ALL of this designed to winnow down the number of companies controlling the food supply from tilling to planting to tending to harvesting to processing and to sales to a relatively small number the majority of which will be controlled by a verifiable handful of companies controlled entirely by their ideological subservience to a few supranational organizations.
Oh, wait! Most of that has already happened.
And for those afraid of cricket powder or gluten or trans fats:
Think of what you should be afraid of, when everything is entirely outside your control and your ability to buy or sell or travel or turn on a light or use your AC or get medical treatment or even vote and congregate in public is under the control of the same sick-ass, ideological control freaks who have been, since the beginning of the 20th century, the primary cause of the largest number of murders (billions), economic destruction, and oppression the world has ever seen.
______
Photo by me. Red winged blackbird about to be eclipsed by some kind of tall, yellow flower. iPhone 6S plus.
Edible mRNA vaccines grown in lettuce are a fact… in Canada since 2020.
Elsewhere, it doesn’t say mRNA, but it does say edible plant based vaccines. I wouldn’t be surprised if it included mRNA as the tech to do so exists.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7120417/
Also Merck is including mRNA vaccine in animals for human consumption for close to a decade.
Are all these lies? I seriously doubt.