Updated on December 21, 2021 in General Stuff
2 on December 20, 2021

I’ve mentioned this before, but I’m a Catholic. A pretty crappy Catholic to be sure, but a Catholic none-the-less.

And I’m also a late in life convert to Catholicism. Bit of a long story but I actually came to that decision of my own volition after a vaguely tepid Protestant/atheist upbringing. So I saw this this morning and was reminded of what that all means. 

  • Liked by
0 on December 21, 2021

I just had time to skim that.

Some provocative stuff. Worth a deeper read.

  • Liked by
0 on December 21, 2021

Ok, worked through it.

My takeaway is that he is correct in the main: “Something” is going on. The unprecedented  and nearly unanimous (to the point of coordinated) response to the emergence of Covid implies the presence of some governing structure that is not readily visible to the public.

That said, I think he stumbles around too much, and even contradicts himself. For example, consider this:

This coup was made possible by an emergency pandemic that is based on the premise of a virus that has a mortality rate almost analogous to that of any other seasonal flu virus, on the delegitimization and prohibition of effective treatments, and on the distribution of an experimental gene serum which is obviously ineffective, and which also clearly carries with it the danger of serious and even lethal side effects. We all know how much the mainstream media has contributed to supporting the insane pandemic narrative, the interests that are at stake, and the goals of these groups of power: reducing the world population, making those who survive chronically ill, and imposing forms of control that violate the fundamental rights and natural liberties of citizens. And yet, two years after this grotesque farce started, which has claimed more victims than a warFrom John Smith

In the same paragraph, we went from “just the flu” to “more victims than a war”.

Which is it?

I think he is on much stronger ground when he points in multiple places to the obvious (and obviously perverse) fact that for almost two years now, any treatment protocol that dares show some promise is quickly and strenuously opposed.

EG: “One of the elements that unequivocally confirms the criminal nature of the Great Reset is the perfect synchrony with which all the different Nations are acting, demonstrating the existence of a single script under a single direction.” I think that’s precisely the point he should be developing, but I also think he is cribbing more than a few cards when he jumps from the presence of the “synchrony” to the “Great Reset”. Maybe he is correct in that, but he leaves the connection so undeveloped, the lazy reader can easily dismiss it as “conspiracy theory”.

I don’t see the connection between any of this and the 2020 election. If the idea at hand is something like “Trump had to be pushed aside in order to complete the nefarious agenda”, then he (our Archbishop, that is) needs to account for two uncomfortable (for him, anyway) facts: Operation Warp Speed was a Trump project, and in practical terms, US national Covid response policy didn’t really change in any meaningful way with the new administration.

Drifting in to global warming, the green economy, and the deep state…well, all I can say is that as a matter of communication and persuasion, mentioning any of that is a mistake. He may believe all these things are interconnected (and they very well may be), but he doesn’t do enough to connect those dots and lead the reader to the source of the corruption.

You might say his argument comes down to “there are watches all over the place, therefore we can imply the presence of a single watchmaker”. Again, for all I know that is exactly right, but he doesn’t provide any basis for it, and opens himself up for the pre-loaded “just a conspiracy kook” dismissal.


I think that from a 50,000 foot view, I generally agree with the Archbishop. 

Something is wrong, and we see evidence of it all around us.

I just think we need to be more focused in trying to figure out what it is.

Here’s a simple one: Pascal’s Wager is the basic idea that if you can do something that might yield benefits, and you can do so for free, then why not do it?

In Pascal’s case it was declaring a belief in God. Doing so costs you nothing, and might gain you everything, so In Pascal’s formulation, there’s no argument against it.

Now, apply Pascal’s wager to Ivermectin. How is the logic not almost exactly the same? IVM is cheap, readily available, and seemingly without deleterious side effects. Is it effective against Covid? There is some reason to think it is, particularly if it is taken in adequate concentrations, as soon as exposure is suspected. Some even advocate a continuous regimen of IVM as a preventative measure.

As a matter of medicine and biology, I think it is generally fair to say that all that falls into a Pascalesque “Can’t Hurt / Might Help” category.

And if someone want’s to argue with me on the “can’t hurt” side of that, I’m open to seeing some data. But I’ve been looking at IVM for over a year, and I haven’t seen anything that suggests there is any meaningful risk to it.

As an aside, I asked my brother (the cardiologist) about all this last year, and he said that one of his partners had done a deep-dive into things, and concluded that Ivermectin was the answer. This was in November, 2020. Before Ivermectin became “horse dewormer”.

So we are left to wonder why the hell “officialdom” is so bound and determined to shout down this possible treatment, to the point that the FDA itself promulgated the “horse paste” propaganda.

Here’s another one: Dr. Peter McCullough pointed to a study that said a twice daily regimen of highly dilute bleach (something like 1/2 TBSP per gallon of water) or iodine solution, taken as a nasal spray until you feel it hit the back of your throat, followed by a gargle with the same solution, appears to offer significant protection against contracting Covid. It may even be the case that that was the source of Trump’s infamous “bleach” comments last year, and he just botched it.

So Trump talks about bleach, possibly in the context of a preventative measure that people can use, and the country spends the next few weeks talking about how stupid he is and how all his stupid supporters are out there injecting bleach and all the rest.


What’s interesting (and contradictory to the Archbishop’s thesis of some invisible, global hegemony) is that some countries (India and Japan come to mind) have in fact embraced Ivermectin, and generally seen positive results.

So everything is falsified. India and Japan put lie to the Archbishop’s thesis of some global hegemony, while simultaneously making Western governments’ reflexive rejection of any treatment protocol all the more inexplicable.

What a mess.


Bret Weinstein likes to say “follow the silence“. What is to be learned by what isn’t being said.

Given what we know about Covid today, what isn’t being said and what does that silence tell us?

For example, we know now (and really, we knew this almost from the beginning) that the two major risk factors are age and excess weight.

There’s nothing any of us can do about age, but everyone can lose weight. So why hasn’t Fauci been on TV every day for the last 20 months encouraging citizens to do so? Instead, we openly (and viciously) scapegoat the unmasked and unvaccinated. Makes no sense. An unmasked and unvaccinated, but otherwise healthy 55 year old is less of a threat for “over-consuming” health care resources than the masked/vaccinated/150lbs overweight 25 year old.


One possibility worth mentioning is this: Perhaps the parsimonious explanation for this general sense that “something is wrong…none of this adds up” is literally a global, mass hysteria. That is far from out of the question, and it does explain everything.


In conclusion, I share the notion that something is wrong. Something is going on, and we can’t exactly put our finger on it. I think the Archbishop over-heated his letter by drifting into too many different areas, trying to pull things together in a “unified field theory” sort of way.

As a personal matter, my response to all this is to simply not participate in any of it. I’m lucky that way, both because of the nature of my personal circumstances, and because I live in a nicely red state with a generally rational governor. (Although I envy Florida for theirs.)

  • Liked by