Hawaii Department of Undead

A hacker, who wishes to be left alone and simply respected as non-living, wears a garland of Hawaiian flowers around the neck as a gentle token of defiance against the lack of labels the undead may use.

The media latched on to yet another story-that-ain’t-a-story. It’s supposed to be about a lawbreaker, Jesse Kipf, who forged a death… certificate. Kipf, a co-parent, doesn’t feel the need to support the children’s custodial birthing unit, and one sure-fire way to dodge financial obligations is to wake up dead.

So Jesse registers with the State of Hawaii as a corpse. It’s said that “dead [men] tell no tales” and happily, they don’t have to pay child support either.

But in a supposedly free society where we freely self-identify from an almost unlimited supply of at least 70 freely-defined genders—it’s so liberating how the government freely goes along with each one we make-up discover—we find ourselves painfully limited to a Neanderthal way of thinking that says we can only be dead or alive.

Ugh! That’s so binary.

I’ve known plenty of people in the hospital who were sicker’n dogs. Some of them got so busy pushin’ up their own daisies that, in the end, they finally kicked the bucket, but none of them ever got to adjust their status while waiting to sprout wings and fly away. Knocking on death’s door isn’t the same as waking up full of vim and vigor and we ought to be able to say so. Just as there are nuances of gender, there are shades of life—including full zombie.

An enlightened society would embrace this. The Civil Rights Act needs to keep up.

Yet in a clear and heavy-handed approach designed to further strip us of our personal agency and autonomy, Uncle Sugar and her merry band of jackboot thugs refuse to recognize that we are, in our own person, who we say we are: dead. That’s all Kipf wanted.

If Ellen Page gets to force its “you-cannot-call-me-by-my-deadname” façade down our collective throats, then why can’t Jesse Kipf claim to be six feet under?

Ellen, born a woman, demands to be recognized as not-a-woman while Jesse, born alive, simply wants to be affirmed as not-alive. Yet Page gets a pass while Kipf takes it on the chin. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.

(As an aside, just think of all the money that could be saved going through “life” as non-living! Income tax, property taxes… all gone. And that abhorrent death tax—by definition these only apply to the transactions of the alive: They can’t be associated with the undead.)

Shoddy reporting and unjust laws

It appears that the story of Kipf, who hasn’t yet seen fit to declare any personal pronouns, is brought to us by a gaggle of reporters who couldn’t be bothered to dig any up, thus Jesse is presumptuously called a “Kentucky man.”

Ugh! That’s so non-DIE.

Necessarily, Kipf took matters into his own hands the hands associated with whatever pronouns have yet to be published. But what should have been applauded as a brazen can-do attitude on the part of the pre-posthumous dead to declare personal status (and demand everyone’s acquiescence) is instead handed out as a blatant crime.

There’s no law against a woman like Page who has a congenital vagina from calling itselves a trans, so why can’t Jesse legally be permitted to be considered as good as dead? We support the one but not the other: How is this considered equality?

A movie star like the Pageboy can have our breasts surgically mutilated, but a corpse like Jesse can’t shave six figures off back child support. Where’s the ACLU?

There’s only one reason for this swift kick in the balls-yet-to-be-attached: The living share an appalling lack of respect for cadavers. Frankly, they’re treated like second-class citizens. But they have feelings just like the un-cadavered. They have abilities and dreams, and one day they’ll have rights too.

Jesse is the pioneer here, sprinting across the finish line to raise awareness of all departed stiffs, including those who can still walk, talk and work a computer. After all, you don’t have to live in a coffin just to be dead: Some live in homes.

That is the. Actual. Story.

On cue, the media missed it. You might have missed it too if it wasn’t mentioned.

Astute readers could be forgiven for wondering how on god’s green earth was someone like Kipf, deceased or otherwise, able to access a government account that was almost two years dead old. An account—still alive active—assigned to someone who no longer held the position for which the account was registered. An account that should have been killed deleted. An account on which administrative oversight should have been exercised but which was obviously ignored for six hundred some-odd days.

Uh-huh, how in hell’s half-acre does this happen? (I bet you’re dying to know.)

If this is an example of the wonderful state of security in the Aloha State, then it’s bad on the island.

Carlton S. Shier, IV, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky, explained, “This case is a stark reminder of how damaging criminals with computers can be, and how critically important computer and online security is to us all.”

Um, apparently not.

That no official was investigated, audited, tried, punished or removed from office for failing to maintain online security in Hawaii is actually the. Real. Story.

Not the efforts of a dead man just trying to get by in a selfish world that refuses to grant him the reality of his feelings and stuff. And everything. And death and taxes.

cites:
• https://archive.is/wip/Ulzj3
• https://archive.ph/wip/9GLp6
• https://archive.ph/CyNXH
• https://archive.is/SFO6x
• https://archive.is/LTkp2

Hero image, caption and text are copyright 2024 by W. “Mac” McMeans

MAGA: a four-letter term for TDS

Donald Trump #45 prepares to jab the Constitution with a hypodermic needle containing the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

We expect the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement to eschew the vax, to resemble “conservatives” and support the Constitution, as they give lip service to all that. Accordingly, we also expect them to cast an upturned nose at candidates who are both as unconstitutional and un-conservative as they come.

Like Biden and Harris.

In light of these optics, why do the red caps warmly embrace a contender like The Don? After all, he is on record as not only demanding constitutional immunity and supporting the vax, but he brags about how quickly he got it out the door. He even claims it saves lives and cures cancer:

❝The Pandemic no longer controls our lives. The Vaccines that saved us from COVID are now being used to help beat Cancer – Turning setback into comeback!” YOU’RE WELCOME, JOE, NINE MONTH APPROVAL TIME VS. 12 YEARS THAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN YOU!❞ (7 MAR 2024)

Of course, this once-Democrat now turned Republican finds it’s not always expedient to brag about his vaccine because, well… it’s just not:

“I really don’t want to talk about it because, as a Republican, it’s not a great thing to talk about, because for some reason it’s just not.”

JUNE 2023

Just when the GOP’s boy seemed halfway warm and cogent, he pulls this out of his hat: a retort resembling the vacuous word salads dripping with the regurgitated duplicity of the other faction’s cerebral giants.

Like Biden and Harris.

Sadly or otherwise, all Don has to do is open his mouth a few times to make clear he can sound precisely like the disturbed idiots his voter base claims to despise. What is MAGA thinking?

Just win, what you believe be damned

Trump, who has been vaccinated, boosted and is proud of it, panders to the anti-vax voter base by keeping his mouth shut, not because his position has changed, but because he’s a politician.

Like Biden and Harris.

The idea is to win: Tell your fans what they want to hear. Or in this case, keep quiet about things you know they won’t swallow.

Because the MAGA peeps also want a win, they have to pretend he’s one of them. (Who else do they have?)

The red caps like to label their detractors with Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). There’s just one problem: The pejorative doesn’t apply to Trump’s opposition.

It seems the mental disconnect actually belongs to “conservatives” who slavishly support a non-conservative. The cognitive dissonance befits those who claim to be constitutional but who clamor for a candidate that won’t be bound by the Constitution whatsoever.

The inconsistent conflicting beliefs originate with those who vehemently oppose forced medical interventions and the lethal vaccine while simultaneously promoting a contender who makes the creation of the vaccine a main selling point.

This has nothing to do with his detractors. It’s in the camp. It’s that good ol’ song and dance: Say you believe one thing and support a candidate who doesn’t.

We have met MAGA and it is self-deranged.

Now, politically or morally, one may evaluate Trump against many criteria and easily find he outshines the current crop of propped-up, sellout politicians.

Like Biden and Harris.

(Seriously, such a low bar isn’t saying much.)

But in foresight, Trump’s track record, braggadocio and stated intentions cannot exonerate the obvious disconnect his MAGA base has with their we-gotta-win-cuz-we-have-nobody-else-even-though-he-supports-the-vax-and-we-don’t candidate.

cite: archive.is/GJ8kx

Hero image, caption and text are copyright 2024 by W. “Mac” McMeans

The 2020 Election

In November and December of 2023, The Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports conducted a landmark survey of U.S. voters in an attempt to definitively assess the degree of fraudulent voting that occurred in the 2020 election.

Findings include:
• 21% of mail-in voters admitted that in 2020 they voted in a state where they are “no longer a permanent resident.”
• 21% of mail-in voters admitted that they filled out a ballot for a friend or family member.
• 17% of mail-in voters said they signed a ballot for a friend or family member “with or without his or her permission.”
• 19% of mail-in voters said that a friend or family member filled out their ballot, in part or in full, on their behalf.
• 8% of all voters said that a “friend, family member, or organization, such as a political party,” offered to pay or reward them for voting.

Survey results suggest that one-in-five mail-in ballots cast were likely fraudulent. Shockingly, this is a conservative estimate.

The policy brief pdf is here.

Censorship Industrial Complex

President and former Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about the Military Industrial Complex. We ignored him.

Today, we have the Censorship Industrial Complex. It’s far worse and ignored just the same. Free speech is chilled, privacy is annulled and security is dismantled. Since we’ve buried our heads in the sand for so long, how can we tell ourselves we don’t deserve it?

When it comes to censorship, everyone’s in on it: think tanks, academia, big tech and Uncle Sugar. This is why you might not perceive it so well—or worse, why you might take it for granted. It’s not a parochial phenom, it’s coordinated and multifaceted: a well-oiled global machine.

This pictograph is part of the “citizen’s starter kit to understanding the new global information cartel.”

source: https://www.racket.news/p/report-on-the-censorship-industrial-74b?publication_id=1042

ref: https://archive.is/RKJ3F

Covid Safety Data

When the CDC created V-Safe as a way to track individuals who received the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines,” the agency vowed to be completely transparent. Remember—despite forcing millions of frightened human beings to take the jab—there were subpar clinical trials.

The free-text entries are critical because, shockingly, despite having an index of “adverse events of special interest” listed in its protocol, V-Safe entirely omitted those same adverse events from being tracked. As explained by ICAN, instead of asking V-safe participants about whether, for example, they experienced things such as anaphylaxis, myocarditis, or coagulopathy after taking an entirely experimental “vaccine” based on technology never before used, the CDC carelessly deliberately only asked about minor and generalized reactions, such as “chills,” “headache,” “fatigue or tiredness,” and “vomiting.”

(permanent archive at https://archive.is/r94do)

Why The WHO Faked A Pandemic

But how could the organization declare a pandemic when its own official definition required “simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness”?

Origin: Feb 5, 2010, 04:35pm EST by Michael Fumento

The World Health Organization (WHO) has suddenly gone from crying “The sky is falling!” like a cackling Chicken Little to squealing like a stuck pig. The reason: charges that the agency deliberately fomented swine flu hysteria. “The world is going through a real pandemic. The description of it as a fake is wrong and irresponsible,” the agency claims on its Web site. A WHO spokesman declined to specify who or what gave this “description,” but the primary accuser is hard to ignore.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), a human rights watchdog, is publicly investigating the WHO’s motives in declaring a pandemic. Indeed, the chairman of its influential health committee, epidemiologist Wolfgang Wodarg, has declared that the “false pandemic” is “one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century.”

Even within the agency, the director of the WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology in Munster, Germany, Dr. Ulrich Kiel, has essentially labeled the pandemic a hoax. “We are witnessing a gigantic misallocation of resources [$18 billion so far] in terms of public health,” he said.

They’re right. This wasn’t merely overcautiousness or simple misjudgment. The pandemic declaration and all the Klaxon-ringing since reflect sheer dishonesty motivated not by medical concerns but political ones.

Unquestionably, swine flu has proved to be vastly milder than ordinary seasonal flu. It kills at a third to a tenth the rate, according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates. Data from other countries like France and Japan indicate it’s far tamer than that.

Indeed, judging by what we’ve seen in New Zealand and Australia (where the epidemics have ended), and by what we’re seeing elsewhere in the world, we’ll have considerably fewer flu deaths this season than normal. That’s because swine flu muscles aside seasonal flu, acting as a sort of inoculation against the far deadlier strain.

Did the WHO have any indicators of this mildness when it declared the pandemic in June?

Absolutely, as I wrote at the time. We were then fully 11 weeks into the outbreak and swine flu had only killed 144 people worldwide–the same number who die of seasonal flu worldwide every few hours. (An estimated 250,000 to 500,000 per year by the WHO’s own numbers.) The mildest pandemics of the 20th century killed at least a million people.

But how could the organization declare a pandemic when its own official definition required “simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” Severity–that is, the number of deaths–is crucial, because every year flu causes “a global spread of disease.”

Easy. In May, in what it admitted was a direct response to the outbreak of swine flu the month before, WHO promulgated a new definition matched to swine flu that simply eliminated severity as a factor. You could now have a pandemic with zero deaths.

Under fire, the organization is boldly lying about the change, to which anybody with an Internet connection can attest. In a mid-January virtual conference WHO swine flu chief Keiji Fukuda stated: “Did WHO change its definition of a pandemic? The answer is no: WHO did not change its definition.” Two weeks later at a PACE conference he insisted: “Having severe deaths has never been part of the WHO definition.”

They did it; but why?

In part, it was CYA for the WHO. The agency was losing credibility over the refusal of avian flu H5N1 to go pandemic and kill as many as 150 million people worldwide, as its “flu czar” had predicted in 2005.

Around the world nations heeded the warnings and spent vast sums developing vaccines and making other preparations. So when swine flu conveniently trotted in, the WHO essentially crossed out “avian,” inserted “swine,” and WHO Director-General Margaret Chan arrogantly boasted, “The world can now reap the benefits of investments over the last five years in pandemic preparedness.”

But there’s more than bureaucratic self-interest at work here. Bizarrely enough, the WHO has also exploited its phony pandemic to push a hard left political agenda.

In a September speech WHO Director-General Chan said “ministers of health” should take advantage of the “devastating impact” swine flu will have on poorer nations to get out the message that “changes in the functioning of the global economy” are needed to “distribute wealth on the basis of” values “like community, solidarity, equity and social justice.” She further declared it should be used as a weapon against “international policies and systems that govern financial markets, economies, commerce, trade and foreign affairs.”

Chan’s dream now lies in tatters. All the WHO has done, says PACE’s Wodart, is to destroy “much of the credibility that they should have, which is invaluable to us if there’s a future scare that might turn out to be a killer on a large scale.”

(This article, which originally appeared in Forbes and was subsequently deleted, is reprinted from Internet Archive.)

Hero image copyright 2024 by W. “Mac” McMeans

EUROPA: The Last Battle

Europa: The Last Battle – All 10 Parts.

Since the mid-20th century, the world has only ever heard one side of the most horrific war in human history. During the 75 years that have now passed, only a single narrative of the great conflict has been heard. This over simplistic narrative totally ignores the previous decades of critical history leading up to World War II, ignores vital information from the actual war years, and outright fabricates lie after lie after lie.

The introduction is narrated by Kenneth O’Keefe, an American-Irish-Palestinian citizen and activist and former United States marine and Gulf War veteran.

This is the documentary that Europol demanded Gab censor from their site. You might as well see what all the fuss is about.

(Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/H3j90XMIfidR/ )

I Walk Cross The Line

Those who know me know I don’t support Brandon any more than I support The Man In Orange. I neither respect nor vote party faction, because the democrats and republicans individually have little substantive difference, and together they form the uniparty that keeps the country in lockstep with tyranny.

I just don’t play the game anymore.

We are no longer a Representative Republic held in check by the Constitution. We are a fully formed, debauched oligarchy with trappings of our former glory; inhabited more and more by 1) generations who know no better and expect even less; 2) illegals recompensed to invade us; and 3) sell-outs in High Office who answer to nothing more than the perverse filth of foreign money and the agenda of the WEF.

Against this backdrop, it appears DJT wants a term as POTUS that’s above oversight, question or repercussions. Our Declaration was written in response to such despotic whims. Shame on us if we continue to acquiesce to this mindset:

❝A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY, WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM/HER TO PROPERLY FUNCTION. ANY MISTAKE, EVEN IF WELL INTENDED, WOULD BE MET WITH ALMOST CERTAIN INDICTMENT BY THE OPPOSING PARTY AT TERM END. EVEN EVENTS THAT “CROSS THE LINE” MUST FALL UNDER TOTAL IMMUNITY, OR IT WILL BE YEARS OF TRAUMA TRYING TO DETERMINE GOOD FROM BAD. THERE MUST BE CERTAINTY. EXAMPLE: YOU CAN’T STOP POLICE FROM DOING THE JOB OF STRONG & EFFECTIVE CRIME PREVENTION BECAUSE YOU WANT TO GUARD AGAINST THE OCCASIONAL “ROGUE COP” OR “BAD APPLE.” SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH “GREAT BUT SLIGHTLY IMPERFECT.” ALL PRESIDENTS MUST HAVE COMPLETE & TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, OR THE AUTHORITY & DECISIVENESS OF A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL BE STRIPPED & GONE FOREVER. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE AN EASY DECISION. GOD BLESS THE SUPREME COURT!❞ (19 JAN 2024)

If you listen to a man long enough, he’ll tell you his bad intentions. The above Truth from Trump illustrates what he wants: all the power with no questions asked. (A Truth is like a tweet from a twit—only it’s totally trustworthy.)

When the Trumpster screams with ALLCAPS that we must live with the “great but slightly imperfect” there’s nothing great about it, because there’s nothing good about a man who wants to sidestep the rules. That all of us are imperfect is a forgone conclusion, and that’s okay: That’s what the rules are for. When you screw up and do things the Constitution prohibits then you’ll be prosecuted. I embrace that reality, and for all his blustering, he should too.

His example of the police is very telling. He presents it as an EITHER/OR scenario. Either you accept bad cops doing bad things equally with the good cops doing their job or you have no cops at all. Who in their right mind accepts a premise like that?! Who in their right mind puts forth a justification like that?!

Sure, there will always be bad cops, but we don’t give them a pass when they “cross the line.” We try them and they face justice. The mitigating factor is there are much fewer bad cops than good cops. Further, their limited sphere of influence attenuates the effects of corruption. What do the good People of Boise care about some crooked cops in Dayton? They’re not affected by a “bad apple” in the Buckeye State.

But Trump’s police analogy goes out the window when he talks about the size of his POTUS. There is only one president, and his influence is global! When he decides to “cross the line,” that’s it. Damage done. For the country and the world! There’s no mechanism to soften the destruction. No American can fully escape the consequences of a bad actor president. Even if you live overseas, you’re still haunted by the perverse decisions of a faulty chief executive when the natives cast a gimlet eye on you, equating your honor with the lack of it they perceive in your president.

Truly, a despot cannot ask for anything more than power without accountability, and Trump makes clear he cannot (or will not) wield presidential authority with any checks and balances attached. He wants total immunity.

It makes you wonder how all those who came before got the job done, with that annoying Constitution always getting in the way of presidential “authority and decisiveness.” (Truth be told, many who came before have ignored the Constitution as much as he claims he needs to.)

There’s no question he’s been targeted by court after court just to make an example of him. While I may sympathize with his plight, I’ll never agree to his demands.

No representative of the People gets to “cross the line” with impunity. It’s debatable how “great” he is, but I’m happy to live with “slightly imperfect” because I hold it accountable nonetheless.

Mr. President, the People keep their own counsel and determine “good from bad.” If you can’t do the job and toe the line then we don’t need you in office.

cite: https://archive.ph/1ibea

Hero image and text are copyright 2024 by W. “Mac” McMeans