Reminds me of one of the insights from ‘Manufacturing Consent’: that very little in the way of overt conspiracy is needed to explain how everyone concerned moves with such self-disciplined unanimity in the required direction. It’s the realities of the system, strait-jacketing and funnelling all interested parties, and how these basic realities are now evolving, which obliges some, a few, of the human playerz involved to plot and set scams going to try to save their stashes of WPS - WealthPowerStatus; and how a great rabble of other chancers on the make then leap aboard because they feel it’s Hobson’s Choice. All of them keeping their perception of what they’re doing under careful doublethink control of course, with whichever line of justification-babble they find most comfortable.
No wide-scale, tightly-disciplined conspiracy needed at all. We are all swept along by the great currents of fate; each swims as s/he feels compelled by personal circumstances, and all fall into synchronous step automatically. It really does feel like a great entrancement episode sweeping across the world. Could hidden influences, beyond any individual human agency, be taking a hand…?
That’s a possibility, although that would mainly apply to those with some status that they are trying to preserve. I would say that, personally, I observe the same dynamics in the off-g supporting crowd as I do in the Fauci supporting crowd. It’s a classic pick-yer-tribe and support them no matter what situation.
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that there’s also a mountain of evidence of sickness, death, treatments etc.
Keeping ones eyes open to all the evidence is something that few people seem interested in. Witness how easily people will grasp death stats from vaccines whilst staunchly denying that anyone died from the actual disease. Or vice-versa.
The supreme irony is how Joseph Mercola is deemed to have cynical financial reasons for ‘peddling’ alternative views on medical Scientism because he ‘peddles’ dietary supplements and other health products.
The virtuous multinationals would never do such a thing of course. They are Good People and they have all those pearl-clutching fellow travellers protecting their flanks because they too are Good People.
The more time goes by the more it seems that Pres Donald J Trump was the perfect puppet for our dark era. His every utterance (and of course many of them were crass, brutal, etc) was prima facie evidence of the ideas that Good People should not countenance.
Well P, I keep saying that I estimate - at present - that there is indeed a real covid-flu about, which seems to be on the high side for nastiness (either engineered in, or naturally occurring, who knows?), and which is killing about the same numbers as usual for seasonal flus, or maybe slightly more; though again, in the fog of a huge propa-push, we can’t see clearly what the numbers are. But they sureashell aren’t global pandemic-sized. Where are the extra heaps of dead, all at once?
I even believe that I had a bout myself of the covid-flu last year, because it took me three days of C-bombing, rather than one night, to obliterate it. As JMGreer put it: “I’ve had worse colds!” True for me too. Earlier in life I still got outright colds/flu illnesses occasionally, before I got the terrain regenerated into good condition…
I don’t believe ANY of the stats for accuracy. But the fact of a tide of poison-stab injuries is made clear by much more than the - admitted by the agencies themselves to be inaccurate - VAERS/YellowCard/EUdraVigilance figures. Our whole reality is anchored on stories. And right now, the stories of more and more people who’ve been savaged by the stabs, or have seen their loved-ones savaged, are coming out too widely, on the grape-vine, for there to be much doubt that they’re real. How large or small a percentage of the global poison-stab tally the injuries are is anybody’s guess just now. But what isn’t in doubt is that there are too damned many - especially for a treatment that is also unnecessary and ineffectual. The whole fakecine con needs to be stopped dead in its tracks, ASAP.
And yep, I too believe in surfing many sources, to get a rounded picture; but with a certain dash of cynical scepticism always in play at all times. Absolutely can’t quarrel with that caveat. I promote it, in fact. Recently, I’ve been getting more convinced about what can be said about the covid episode with a fair degree of confidence; and I’ve been laying those convictions out en claire. But with no rabid, fanatical certainty attached. These things may be so…probably…though still, possibly not…keep watching and musing…Permanently!!!
The difference between the 2 tribes is the same as Israel v Palestine - the Fauci crowd outgun the Off-G crowd a billion to none! Owning all the MSM and able to threaten alternate media into silence gives the Fauci view enormous leverage over the message that becomes the established “truth”.
The important difference is that the Fauci tribe are wrong-uns, and fundamentally wrong. The others, not so much. One lot are wilful crooks (though of course they refuse to see themselves thus, for the most part), the other are dissident clear-seers, wishing and hoping for a serious restraint of the crooks’ crimes.
And both bloody lots are well stocked with awkward sods, tunnel-visioners, and outright loonies. Dear god…!
No argument from me. But surely the most effective way to combat a false narrative is to actually pay even closer attention to the full set of evidence?
For example, there would be no point championing Ivermectin as a treatment if we can’t even agree that there is a virus infecting and killing people…
That is a very good point - “the full set of evidence” by what rules of evidence do we determine whether certain statements/ papers are admissible in the court of public discussion? We talk about bias and conflicts of interest and assume we can discern these factors from our online resources - but can we really know without hiring experts to investigate, this then becomes a monetary issue - who can afford the best investigators, and we all know the answer to that.
But is there a practice in investigation and research, as there is in the law, where big money engages all the best experts as their exclusive advisers/ researchers/investigators? So is there a level playing field in the analysis of bias and interests?
Further, if investigators/researchers know how to find information they will also know how to bury it or obfuscate its discovery!
These factors would also influence the discovery of fraud or criminal threats or worse in controlling information or establishing the “truth” as perceived by different groups in society.
Evidence is a tricky business as we have seen in our discussions just on this great little site.
Then there is the type of evidence that is accepted as admissible - this has to be a level playing field and not based on the ability to pay out millions for RCT double blind trials of thousands no matter how desirable this type of testing is.
Once evidence has been accepted as admissable for public debate who determines what is the plain meaning to be derived from that evidence - like all religions, science is written in a highly technical language which requires translation by acceptable priests. Who appoints and pays for the priests - that’s a question not a statement
As to whether there is a virus that is infecting people and killing people - these are radically different questions.
We have known for decades that the common cold is a corona virus- Doctors apparently write this down on a patient’s notes when we would just say “it’s a cold”! We know that flu is a corona virus and I understand that we have evidence that the MERS and SARS corona viruses have been purified and photographed by electron microscopy. So a lot of corona viruses have been proved beyond doubt to have existed or to exist - but I’m still waiting to see a photograph of an isolated purified distinct substance called SARS-CoV-2, it’s more than possible I missed it!
To be clear I believe SARS-CoV-2 does exist because I accept that all the evidence of hospitalisations injury and deaths in the UK from April to June last year could only have been due IN PART AT LEAST to a virus given the early universality of the usual respiratory symptoms with the added peculiarity of vascular problems at a later stage suggesting a marked difference from other viruses. So why not call it SARS-CoV-2 - but I still haven’t seen a picture of one!
At the same time accepting that SARS-CoV-2 does exist does not mean that I accept it is WHOLLY responsible for all the ill health, injuries and deaths which is attributed to it. There are outstanding questions which need to be still addressed:
We know that a cold can kill a person with a seriously impaired immune system but do we ever write on the death certificate : cause of death - a cold! So with SC2 there are degrees of relevance of the virus which relate to the level of current immunity of the person on infection as well as the extent of the infection in terms of quantity and perhaps intensity of infection. As well as immunity levels at infection there are questions as to how immunity levels vary and impact throughout the infection period as examined by Cohen particularly. We have discussed the point about chronic stress immobilising the immune system opening up bodies to new infections and different symptoms.
Why are children and teenagers rarely impacted in any serious way by SC2 - is this just another example of really brilliant immune systems or do they have less available receptors to which the virus can attach?
When this first kicked off in Italy there were commentators who questioned whether the prior inection with a particular type of flu vaccine had anything to do with the severity of the SC2 impact. Has this been discounted or replicated elsewhere?
4.What is it about HCQ and Ivermectin that reduces the impact of SC2 ?
At what point in the infection period does SC2 change from a respiratory infection to a vascular issue?
How many deaths were caused by the stress created and by the lack of treatment until hospitalisation and the wrong treatments?
All these impact the question of whether and by how much the virus killed or injured people. The use of PCR and LF testing to determine anything should in my view be heavily discounted.
I have probably missed the answers to some or maybe all of these as I seem to have arrived late at the party! Apologies if this is the case.
