Cedar Meats, the coup against the president & Fauci, the deep state “expert”

She had one job. Instead, she decided to be a twitter troll & take a big dump on Captain James Cook. But this boomerang does come back:

According to the Chief Health Officer’s website, Dr Annaliese van Diemen “leads the response to communicable disease incidents and emergencies”.

That’s right: On the exact same day they shut down the facility, the person responsible, was too busy tweeting provocative, fake, anti-Australian rhetoric. The Deputy Chief Health officer neglected her actual duty that day, putting Victorian lives at risk.

Peter Dutton called for Dr Annaliese to be fired for that Tweet. We disagree because free speech is essential.

She should be fired for failing at her job and charged with manslaughter if there are any deaths associated with Ceder Meats.

On the same day they shut down the facility, the person responsible, was too busy tweeting provocative, fake, anti-Australian rhetoric.


Annaliese van Diemen is to blame for Cedar Meats debacle

Like I said: she had one job and she fukced it up, badly.

Spare us the insidious, parasitic virus of cultural commissars

The Mocker The Australian May 7, 2020

Was ever a great man more maligned than James Cook? He was a legend in the fields of navigation, cartography, exploration, and leadership, yet mere mention of his name these days invokes accusations of imperialism, genocide, and cultural hegemony. So dastardly and numerous are the crimes against his person, it is hard to say which one is the cruellest, whether it is ending up …

Continue Reading

Image may contain: 2 people, eyeglasses and closeup

Rosenstein Scope Memo For Mueller Peddled Steele Dossier, Logan Act Conspiracy Theories

A newly declassified memorandum from Rod Rosenstein shows that the former deputy attorney general used bogus claims from discredited Clinton campaign operative Christopher Steele to justify Robert Mueller’s investigation of the Trump campaign.

Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s memo authorizing Robert Mueller’s anti-Trump investigation was riddled with conspiracy theories lifted straight from the bogus dossier of Christopher Steele, a newly released, less redacted version of the memo shows. The memo, portions of which were declassified on April 30, 2020, specifically targeted former Trump campaign affiliates Carter Page, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn

COVER-UP: Fauci Approved Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine 15 Years Ago to Cure Coronaviruses; “Nobody Needed to Die”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose “expert” advice to President Trump has resulted in the complete shutdown of the greatest economic engine in world history, has known since 2005 that chloroquine is an effective inhibitor of coronaviruses.

More below the fold.

Dr. Fauci Likely Broke US Regulations and US Law When He Funded Wuhan Lab to Continue Coronavirus Projects That Were Banned in US in 2014

Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose “expert” advice to President Trump has resulted in the complete shutdown of the greatest economic engine in world history, has known since 2005 that chloroquine is an effective inhibitor of coronaviruses.

How did he know this? Because of research done by the National Institutes of Health, of which he is the director. In connection with the SARS outbreak – caused by a coronavirus dubbed SARS- CoV – the NIH researched chloroquine and concluded that it was effective at stopping the SARS coronavirus in its tracks. The COVID-19 bug is likewise a coronavirus, labeled SARS-CoV-2. While not exactly the same virus as SARS-CoV-1, it is genetically related to it, and shares 79% of its genome, as the name SARS-CoV-2 implies. They both use the same host cell receptor, which is what viruses use to gain entry to the cell and infect the victim.

The Virology Journal – the official publication of Dr. Fauci’s National Institutes of Health – published what is now a blockbuster article on August 22, 2005, under the heading – get ready for this – “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread.” (Emphasis mine throughout.) Write the researchers, “We report…that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage.”

Dr. Anthony FauciThis means, of course, that Dr. Fauci (pictured at right) has known for 15 years that chloroquine and it’s even milder derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) will not only treat a current case of coronavirus (“therapeutic”) but prevent future cases (“prophylactic”). So HCQ functions as both a cure and a vaccine. In other words, it’s a wonder drug for coronavirus. Said Dr. Fauci’s NIH in 2005, “concentrations of 10 μM completely abolished SARS-CoV infection.” Fauci’s researchers add, “chloroquine can effectively reduce the establishment of infection and spread of SARS-CoV.”

Dr. Didier Raoult, the Anthony Fauci of France, had such spectacular success using HCQ to treat victims of SARS-CoV-2 that he said way back on February 25 that “it’s game over” for coronavirus.

He and a team of researchers reported that the use of HCQ administered with both azithromycin and zinc cured 79 of 80 patients with only “rare and minor” adverse events. “In conclusion,” these researchers write, “we confirm the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine associated with azithromycin in the treatment of COVID-19 and its potential effectiveness in the early impairment of contagiousness.”

The highly-publicized VA study that purported to show HCQ was ineffective showed nothing of the sort. HCQ wasn’t administered until the patients were virtually on their deathbeds when research indicates it should be prescribed as soon as symptoms are apparent. Plus, HCQ was administered without azithromycin and zinc, which form the cocktail that makes it supremely effective. At-risk individuals need to receive the HCQ cocktail at the first sign of symptoms.

But Governor Andrew Cuomo banned the use of HCQ in the entire state of New York on March 6, the Democrat governors of Nevada and Michigan soon followed suit, and by March 28 the whole country was under incarceration-in-place fatwas.

Nothing happened with regard to the use of HCQ in the U.S. until March 20, when President Trump put his foot down and insisted that the FDA consider authorizing HCQ for off-label use to treat SARS-CoV-2.

On March 23, Dr. Vladimir Zelenko reported that he had treated around 500 coronavirus patients with HCQ and had seen an astonishing 100% success rate. That’s not the “anecdotal” evidence Dr. Fauci sneers at, but actual results with real patients in clinical settings.

“Since last Thursday, my team has treated approximately 350 patients in Kiryas Joel and another 150 patients in other areas of New York with the above regimen. Of this group and the information provided to me by affiliated medical teams, we have had ZERO deaths, ZERO hospitalizations, and ZERO intubations. In addition, I have not heard of any negative side effects other than approximately 10% of patients with temporary nausea and diarrhea.”

Said Dr. Zelenko:

“If you scale this nationally, the economy will rebound much quicker. The country will open again. And let me tell you a very important point. This treatment costs about $20. That’s very important because you can scale that nationally. If every treatment costs $20,000, that’s not so good.

All I’m doing is repurposing old, available drugs which we know their safety profiles, and using them in a unique combination in an outpatient setting.”

The questions are disturbing to a spectacular degree. If Dr. Fauci has known since 2005 of the effectiveness of HCQ, why hasn’t it been administered immediately after people show symptoms, as Dr. Zelenko has done? Maybe then nobody would have died and nobody would have been incarcerated in place except the sick, which is who a quarantine is for in the first place. To paraphrase Jesus, it’s not the symptom-free who need HCQ but the sick. And they need it at the first sign of symptoms.

While the regressive health care establishment wants the HCQ cocktail to only be administered late in the course of the infection, from a medical standpoint, this is stupid. Said one doctor, “As a physician, this baffles me. I can’t think of a single infectious condition — bacterial, fungal, or viral — where the best medical treatment is to delay the use of an anti-bacterial, anti-fungal, or anti-viral until the infection is far advanced.”

So why has Dr. Fauci minimized and dismissed HCQ at every turn instead of pushing this thing from jump street? He didn’t even launch clinical trials of HCQ until April 9, by which time 33,000 people had died. READ MORE:


More from the Mocker on Captain James Cook & that insufferable Anneliese van Diemen:

Was ever a great man more maligned than James Cook? He was a legend in the fields of navigation, cartography, exploration, and leadership, yet mere mention of his name these days invokes accusations of imperialism, genocide, and cultural hegemony. So dastardly and numerous are the crimes against his person, it is hard to say which one is the cruellest, whether it is ending up a historical pariah, or being murdered, disembowelled, broiled and returned to his crew in bits, or having Sydney Morning Herald columnist Peter FitzSimons as his biographer.

Whatever the case, we cannot deny that on April 29, 1770 Cook arrived on this continent, an event that would eventually lead to the founding of one of the most successful, harmonious, and multiracial democracies the world has known.

Understandably, many indigenous Australians do not regard Cook’s landing as cause for a celebration. Neither do Greens politicians, student activists, left-wing academics, or many other misery merchants who, despite their purported abhorrence of colonisation, choose to remain on this land.

Their opposition was always expected. But as it turned out, most commemorations were cancelled due to coronavirus restrictions. Given Cook had been denied that, was it unreasonable to expect his critics, especially well-remunerated officials, to refrain from denigrating him on that special day?

Sadly, it was. “Sudden arrival of an invader from another land, decimating populations, creating terror,” tweeted Victoria’s deputy chief health officer, Dr Annaliese van Diemen. “Forces the population to make enormous sacrifices & completely change how they live in order to survive. COVID-19 or Cook 1770?”

For the sake of Victoria and the rest of the country, let’s hope the good doctor knows far more about pandemics than she does about history, because she is a quack when it comes to the latter. As Australian National University historian Professor Angela Woollacott observed, this was “a very misleading comparison”.

“There were no sudden terror, enormous sacrifices or complete changes on a large scale,” said Woollacott last week. “In 1789 there was an epidemic of smallpox around the Sydney area that then spread more widely with devastating effects for Aboriginal people. But the large-scale dispossession of land, widespread frontier conflict, loss of livelihood and culture and stolen children occurred slowly over the 19th and 20th centuries.”

Van Diemen had tweeted from a private account, but her official title is displayed prominently in her Twitter bio. By drawing an analogy involving the foremost priority of her office, she effectively ensured this tweet had her employer’s imprimatur. Even The Age editorialised she should apologise.

“For a senior government official entrusted with giving advice on the deadliest pandemic in a century to be offering up such historical analogies on social media is completely out of bounds,” it said.

By tweeting so, van Diemen joins a long list of officials who, despite holding impressive qualifications, have made a dill of themselves on social media. As to why she slandered Cook, look no further than what she tweeted in 2015, a year before she was employed by the Department of Health and Human Services.

“The system was created by white men for white men,” she said.

You can see where this is going. Cook is the embodiment of white patriarchy and privilege (forget that he was a self-made man who came from humble beginnings), which automatically warrants punitive revisionism and nullifying of all his achievements.

For her target audience, van Diemen’s historical howlers are of minor importance. With her cheap iconoclastic shot, she has publicly validated her credentials as the great white woman who weeps for the wretched, as well as affirming her self-loathing.

State Opposition Health spokeswoman Georgie Crozier called for van Diemen to resign, while Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton said she should be sacked.

Two things to consider in response to that: First, the Morrison Government has set aside millions for honouring Cook; and second: Victoria is the state of provincial wokeness. For the likes of van Diemen, pissing off your political masters’ Canberra counterparts will, if anything, get you a pay rise.

The Victorian Public Sector Commission has already announced it will not take disciplinary action against van Diemen. Earlier. DHHS Secretary Kym Peake had advised the tweet had been sent when she “was not at work and was given in her personal capacity”.

But that is a specious distinction, given it was sent via a departmental phone. Peake can stress all she likes that van Diemen has met senior departmental managers “to discuss the risks of private use of social media when working in the public sector, and particularly when occupying a role that involves high profile public communication,” but neither the tweet concerned nor her official title has been removed from the DCHO’s “private” account.

Van Diemen’s defenders, including Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews, have dismissed criticism of her as ballyhoo, highlighting her valuable work in combating coronavirus. Also, being a senior official is not necessarily a bar to showing contempt for mainstream Australia and its origins. In fact, it is almost mandatory for academics, human rights officials and journalists of our national broadcaster.

But van Diemen is still a public servant, albeit one with a stethoscope. She has a statutory obligation to be “impartial, apolitical and behave in a way that sustains public trust”.

She might also want to read her department’s annual report from last year, specifically that excerpt which notes that Aboriginal children and families should be encouraged to “to be strong in culture and proud of their unique identity”.

Presumably this would mean not tweeting that the arrival of humans in this continent tens of thousands of years ago also had catastrophic consequences for the native animals, with 85 per cent of megafauna being wiped out.

Would she suggest the ancestors of indigenous people were analogous to a deadly virus, or are her fashionable denigrations reserved only for dead white males?

This is not the first time van Diemen has used her public profile for political purposes. In October 2016, having joined DHHS in March of that year, she signed a petition decrying Australia’s offshore immigration detention centres, specifying that she was in “public health”.

In 2014 she retweeted a claim from human rights lawyer Julian Burnside to the effect that student Freya Newman “deserves a medal, not a penalty”.

Newman, formerly an employee of Whitehouse Institute Design, had used her position to access confidential data relating to the awarding of a scholarship to then Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s daughter Frances, and later pleaded guilty to accessing restricted data.

Given the vastness and sensitivity of the personal information that DHHS holds and van Diemen’s senior position, you would hope van Diemen does not condone the actions of departmental employees who commit such breaches.

The VPSC may well regret it did not decisively call out van Diemen’s use of departmental resources for partisan comment. By not doing so, it has sent the wrong message to all public sector employees in the state, particularly those in DHHS. After all, leaders lead by example, whether it be good or bad.

If van Diemen can publicly comment on political issues, why not all public servants? We could start with DHHS’s decision in 2018 to observe “They Day” every month. On that day, its 10,000 employees are asked to avoid “gendered” language and instead use neutral pronouns such as “they” or “them”.

A question for all DHHS employees: do you feel abolishing gendered pronouns is a good thing or do you think this Newspeak is a virus that attacks the English language? Don’t be shy: tell us how you feel about this and other issues. Do you think that biology determines gender? What is your attitude towards giving puberty-blocking drugs to young children who think they were born in the “wrong body”?

What do you think of the Victorian Government’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak at Cedar Meats (currently 62 cases)? Note, when answering, do not forget to put your name and official title in your social media bio. Oh, and if you are using a departmental phone to respond, please wait until your rostered day off. I am joking of course. Public servants should always act impartially and apolitically. But imagine the furore if employees with conservative views took advantage of this. I doubt whether they would receive the leniency that van Diemen enjoyed.

Finally, there is another insidious virus which increasingly threatens this country’s economic and social wellbeing. It is parasitic, it stifles initiative, it rewards mediocrity, it targets this country’s white blood cells, it causes paralysis, it makes people question their self-worth, it causes divisiveness, and it makes intelligent people deny objective reasoning. We have the means to cure it, but for some reason we lack the willpower. Spare us please the virus of the cultural commissars.