Jim Treacher.

It’s been over 150 years since the Confederate States of America were soundly and justly defeated …

Oh go pound sand, jerk.  And where’s all the manufacturing capability now?  Who has the firearms makers now?  Care to try this again?

The subject of this is that they’ve removed a statue of Robert E. Lee.  I happen to think he wasn’t that great of a general, and forced his generals to send troops into an open killing field to be slaughtered, in the middle of the afternoon, while artillery was too far away to do any real good.

What he should have done is silently advance in the middle of the night and be prepared to shoot eyeball to eyeball at daybreak, while also sending some of his troops in a pincer move to the rear and enfilade.  The North Koreans and Chinese did this, and it caused problems for U.S. troops (given the overwhelming number of Chinese troops).

He was a horrible tactician, and as for strategy, there was no good reason for taking the fight north.

As for the removal of his statue, shame.

The “fact checkers” will tell you that there are no aborted baby parts being used in the the development or generation of the Covid vaccines.  This is the explanation Reuters gives.

A Facebook video discussing the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine for COVID-19 has falsely claimed it contains tissue from an aborted human foetus.

The video (here), broadcast live on Nov. 15, first shows a picture on a computer screen of the packaging for the AstraZeneca-developed COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1-S, also known as AZD1222. It then changes to a window showing a page of research into AZD1222, which reads: “We used direct RNA sequencing to analyse transcript expression from the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 genome in human MRC-5 and A549 cell lines that are non-permissive for vector replication alongside the replication permissive cell line, HEK293” (here) .

The user in the video then switches to a Wikipedia page for further research on this mention of MRC-5, which she points out is a cell line “originally developed from research deriving lung tissue of a 14-week-old aborted Caucasian male fetus” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRC-5) . Speaking to her audience about the composition of the vaccine, the user says: “one thing it definitely has is the lung tissue of a 14-week-old aborted Caucasian male foetus.”

This is not true. AstraZeneca has confirmed to Reuters via email that AZD1222 was not developed using MRC-5 cell lines. The study, which was published on Research Square and was referred to by the Facebook user, is an independent study led by scientists at the University of Bristol (here, here) to test the efficacy of the potential vaccine prior to human trials. It tested this by observing how AZD1222 gets to work when inserted into a human cell line, ie: MRC-5 cell lines. This is not the same as developing a vaccine whereby MRC-5 is an ingredient in the final product.

AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) is a weakened and non-replicating version of the common cold virus (adenovirus) taken from chimpanzees, which has been engineered to contain instructions for creating the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 – the virus that causes COVID-19 (here, here) . An article published in the journal Nature (here) says the vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 used T-Rex 293 HEK cells in the virus propagation stage. This refers to ‘human embryonic kidney’ cells, which are from a different human cell line.

Dr David Matthews, a reader of virology at Bristol University and co-author on the vaccine study, told Reuters. “Many virus vaccines are made in embryonic/foetal derived cell lines and then the vaccine is purified away from these cells to exceptionally high standards. Most of these cell lines (including MRC-5 cells and 293 cells) were derived from tissue samples taken from foetuses aborted in the 1960s and 1970s and the cells have been grown in laboratories all over the world since then.”

Gary McLean, a professor of molecular immunology at London Metropolitan University, also told Reuters that this vaccine would also be “purified” of any contaminants before being used in humans. He said: “The AstraZeneca vaccine requires the adenoviral vector to be produced in these cells and it is then purified before administering to people.”

It is not accurate to say MRC-5 cell lines are the same cells from an aborted foetus. They are cell lines that have been grown in a laboratory from a primary cell culture originally taken from a foetus. For MRC-5 specifically, this was done on a male Caucasian foetus that was electively aborted in the 1960s (here, here). There is another cell line called WI-38 that was also propagated from a foetus aborted in the 1960s.

Oregon Live answers this way.

A spokesperson for AstraZeneca confirmed to the AP that the company does not use MRC-5 cells in the development of its vaccine.

Researchers at the University of Bristol, who were independent from the vaccine’s development, injected the COVID-19 vaccine into MRC-5 cell lines as part of their own study. MRC-5 cells are what is known as an immortalized cell line, which can reproduce indefinitely.

Such cell lines are used in vaccine production to grow viruses in order to keep them from replicating. The AstraZeneca and Oxford vaccine relies on a harmless chimpanzee cold virus to carry the coronavirus spike protein into the body in order to create an immune response.

AstraZeneca did not use MRC-5 cells, but it did use a different producer cell line to develop it: Human Embryonic Kidney 293 TREX cells.

According to the University of Oxford development team, the original Human Embryonic Kidney 293 cells were taken from the kidney of an aborted fetus in 1973, but the cells used now are clones of the original cells. Dr. Deepak Srivastava, president of Gladstone Institutes and former president of the International Society for Stem Cell Research, said fetal cell lines were critical in developing hepatitis, measles and chickenpox vaccines.

“What’s important for the public to know even if they are opposed to the use of fetal cells for therapies, these medicines that are being made and vaccines do not contain any aspect of the cells in them,” Srivastava said. “The cells are used as factories for production.”

The “Bioethics Observatory” also has an assessment of this.  The discussions above are unnecessarily complicated, because they differentiate between the actual stem cells of the aborted babies, and what they are calling the “immortalized cell lines,” which are not directly of the baby, but rather, are produced by cells from the aborted baby.

At least Roman Catholic churches see the problem (note, I am not Roman Catholic, I am protestant, and more specifically, a traditional Calvinist).

“There’s a lot of concern and interest in this issue — what’s the vaccine going to look like? What kind of moral choices are we going to have before us?” said Greg Schleppenbach, the associate director of Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

At issue is the use of cells derived from human fetal tissue to discover, develop and test medical innovation — something scientists agree is often necessary in the most groundbreaking medical advances.

Recent polling reveals a split amongst Americans: roughly 6 in 10 adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 38% say it should be illegal in all or most cases.

[ … ]

Conservative groups long-opposed to abortion have advocated against what they call “ethically problematic” fetal material — tissue obtained via elected termination of pregnancy, and cell lines descendent from them.

It’s not a simple ask (sic, ‘task’): some of the most commonly used cell lines in medical research originated that way. The experimental antibody treatment from Regeneron that was taken by Trump to treat COVID-19 was developed using cells derived originally from human kidney tissue taken from an aborted fetus in the 1970s. Several of the vaccine candidates for the virus also use that line.

The cells from that tissue, the HEK293T cell line, have continued to divide and grow in a culture, and have been used in scientific discovery, for decades.

Regeneron says it does not consider the treatment to have relied on fetal tissue, since the cells were acquired so long ago.

They “are considered ‘immortalized’ cells (not stem cells) and are a common and widespread tool in research labs,” a Regeneron spokesperson told ABC in a statement. The cell line “wasn’t used in any other way, and fetal tissue was not used in this research.”

The church has for more than 2000 years held that life begins at conception.  This isn’t the first time we’ve faced issues with euthanasia.  Abortifacients (chemical agents) were in use during the days of the Greek empire, as well as the Roman empire at the time of Christ.

Jeremiah 1:5 is important, stating “”Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.”  This should suffice for the reader, but if it doesn’t, another hundred verses, all read perfectly within context, could be produced.

But rather than explain the case against abortion, or trying to convince someone that life begins at conception, the main point is that Christians believe that life begins at conception based on the Scripture, regardless of what anyone else believes.

A simple denial that the cells from aborted babies were used to develop the vaccine isn’t sufficient.  What they are calling the “immortalized cell lines” wouldn’t exist if not for the original cell lines from the aborted baby.

The answers given by the fact checkers are almost amusing in their stupidity.  Answering in the way they do betrays an abject ignorance of classical Christian theology, assuming that a mere reference to the product of a product of an aborted baby removes it from the Biblical considerations that would be applied to the product of an aborted baby.  Such silly mental machinations are sufficient for people who do not believe in anything, but not for committed Christians.

Vaccines were not always developed this way, so it’s possible not to have done this.  That isn’t what they’ve chosen to do.  We shouldn’t claim that someone who gets the vaccine has committed a sin from which God cannot forgive.  God can forgive anyone for anything they’ve done conditioned upon confession to Him and a contrite heart.

This isn’t about that.  For me, this is about me, my faith, what I believe, and what I’m willing to do.  Who am I, what kind of man am I, and what kind of faith do I have, if I claim to believe certain things, and under just a little bit of pressure, jettison those doctrines in favor of what the world is doing?

No, this is about strengthening and displaying my own faith.  It is both a building block, and a test at the same time.  I said earlier that I am a committed Calvinist.  I do not intend to jump off of a building and dare God to catch me.  That would be tempting God, and it is a sin.  But I will not perish one nanosecond before my time is complete, and I will not live one nanosecond after my time on earth is complete.  My days are numbered, just as the hairs on my head (both of which are disappearing).  It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgment.  My appointed time was written down before I was ever born.  Nothing can bring it sooner than that, and nothing can delay it.

On a related note, it’s amazing the cavalier nature with which “researchers” today are treating humans (whom they see as animals, not made in God’s image).

Baby Mary might have been born and grown up to become the medical researcher who discovered the cure for cancer, but instead she was aborted in the 18th week of her mother’s pregnancy.

But despite being aborted, Baby Mary today still has a role in medical research. Or at least a piece of her scalp does. When Baby Mary was killed in her mother’s womb and her tiny body dismembered, a piece of her scalp containing hair follicles was sold on the fetal tissue gray market.

As a  result, part of Baby Mary may now be found growing on the body of a laboratory rodent, thanks to researchers at the University of Pittsburgh. Here are photos of some of their work in progress …

There are of course other problems with the Covid vaccine.

• The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination. This so-called antibody-dependent amplification, ADE, has long been known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats, for example. In the course of these studies all cats that initially tolerated the vaccination well died after catching the wild virus.
• The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be absolutely ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.
• The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination.

Hospital workers have had allergic reactions to the vaccine, and the Sydney Morning Herald explains why Australia is having problems with its own brand of the vaccine.

A billion-dollar deal for the Morrison government to buy more than 50 million doses of the University of Queensland’s potential coronavirus vaccine has been abruptly terminated after several trial participants returned false positive HIV test results.

UQ, working in partnership with Australian global biotech company CSL, will abandon its current clinical trials following the discovery. It informed the federal government of the initial data on Monday, which was then referred to health authorities for urgent medical advice.

“False” positives, they are claiming.

Sources with knowledge of the current trials said pathology tests had in the past weeks confirmed the positives were in fact false and the health of the participants has not been put at risk.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the national security committee of cabinet agreed to terminate the purchasing agreement on Thursday, following expert health advice and fears the revelation would severely damage the Australian public’s confidence in the COVID-19 vaccination program, which is expected to begin early next year.

“We have prepared for this. We have planned for this. And now we’re making decisions in accordance with this,” he said on Friday morning.

He said the government had “spread the risk” by entering into multiple agreements and had secured 20 million new doses from Oxford University-AstraZeneca and another 11 million from Novavax to cover for the 51 million doses the home-grown product was to supply.

“The net out-take of this is we are more likely to have the entire population vaccinated earlier rather than later by the ability to bring this manufacturing capability forward,” Mr Morrison said.

The UQ vaccine candidate used a protein and adjuvant platform, containing the COVID-19 spike protein and a “molecular clamp”. A small component is derived from the human immunodeficiency virus, known as HIV, that is not able to infect people or replicate.

The allergic reactions to the vaccine might be coming from the fact that this is a messenger RNA vaccine (the mRNA tricks the DNA into producing the spike protein of the virus), and to date no article I’ve found explains how this system is turned off rather than cascades and continues.

The article from Australia is noteworthy in its honesty (at least, its partial honesty).  I don’t believe these are necessarily “false” positive tests, but either way, there is HIV in the spike protein.  We’ve known that for a very long time now.  But I challenge readers to find a single article published in America that admits that there is HIV in the spike protein.  Doing so would be tantamount to an admission that this virus isn’t zoonotic, but rather, engineered in a laboratory.  It might also convince the American people not to take the vaccine.

In summary, this all explains why I will not be taking the vaccine.  Every man and woman must make his or her own decisions, but for the Christian, there are special considerations.

I wouldn’t doubt it, there’s money to be made.  I’m not certain who’s declaring that no ammunition is being made, but I don’t think they understand basic supply and demand economics.

For the most comprehensive analysis I can provide you, see the 2020 Election Fraud tag.  For today’s installment, see the following.

Peter Navarro wrote a report assessing the sweep of fraud.  It must have gotten some traction, causing a certain Philip Bump to answer it in a Washington Post article.  He writes “The goal of Navarro’s document was largely to elevate unfounded suspicion by creating a catalogue of various false claims about the election, many of which have been similarly elevated by Trump.”  So the CIA’s blog is in the tank for Biden, as you can see.  I recall another president who wanted to reign in the CIA.  He was assassinated.

The Epoch Times did a documentary entitled “Who’s Stealing America?”

Capital Research Center wrote an analysis entitled Did the Center for Voter Information Intervene Illegally in the 2020 Election?

Dominion Whistleblower: “90% of the people working there (in Detroit) were in on the fraud going on.”

That’s enough for today.  Readers can add in the comments.

You’ve all heard about Dominion voting systems and their corruption.  A name you haven’t heard yet is Hart InterCivic.

The theft and deception runs deep within the deep state.

Via reddit/firearms.

For the record, I don’t think the DOJ/ATF was trying to clarify anything.  I think they intended to muddy the waters and use fear as a tactic.  Also for the record, I don’t think fear is going to work as a tactic.

That’s not the name of a court case, but I expect it will be in the future.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has accused the Fort Worth-based website Cheaper Than Dirt, which primarily sells firearms, ammunition and hunting gear, of price gouging at the start of the pandemic.

The AG’s office identified over 4,000 sales that involved price gouging and has directed Cheaper Than Dirt to pay $402,786 in refunds to consumers, according to court documents filed this month.

Over 100 people have complained to the AG’s office about Cheaper Than Dirt, the Houston Chronicle reported earlier this year.

The same week that Gov. Greg Abbott made a pandemic-related disaster declaration in Texas, ammunition orders to Cheaper Than Dirt substantially increased. In response to the increased demand for its products, the website raised the prices on hundreds of its products, according to the AG’s office.

The Texas AG’s office has identified ammunition as a necessity and, as a result, is arguing that those price hikes were against the Texas Business and Commerce Code. The code forbids businesses from “taking advantage of a disaster” by selling “fuel, food, medicine, lodging, building materials, construction tools or another necessity at an exorbitant or excessive price.”

Additionally, the following weekend that Abbott issued the disaster declaration, Cheaper Than Dirt manually raised its prices outside of its normal schedule.

“Making these manual ‘real-time’ price changes caused confusion for consumers because the prices consumers saw on the website pages when selecting items for purchase were different from the prices that appeared in the final check-out cart,” the AG’s office said in court documents.

Some of the comments I’ve seen online point to declarations of guns and ammunition as being essential and necessary, and you can’t benefit from that in a time of emergency (not that I agree with Covid being an “emergency”) and then raise prices without running afoul of the law.

On the other hand, making stores and products available in an emergency isn’t the same thing as buying them for you, or even ensuring price controls.

I don’t believe in price controls.  No free market advocate believes in price controls.  I’ve seen the CTD ads in my in-box and if I stupidly open them, I usually laugh out loud at the prices.

You can find better ammo prices elsewhere by a large margin.  It just requires a little work.  I choose to ignore the CTD ads, almost never visit their web site, and just don’t shop there.  They’ll probably never get any business back from me.

That’s how it’s supposed to work.  Screw the customer, lose your customer base.  The government should have nothing to do with it.  However, I will say that letting people drop things in online carts and then raising the prices is pretty stupid.  There should be a time-out on carts, and users should be informed what that is.