Even those
who aren’t paying attention, probably know by now that access to information is
being blocked. Apparently, a handful of people have decided that our new normal
does not include the right to speak or hear unapproved facts. To the extent
possible, they’re creating a digital echo chamber; where they write the official
narrative, and only those who repeat the narrative are permitted
to be seen and heard.
There’s a
science to making people believe things that are not true. Bertrand Russel, an
expert on the topic, argued in the 1930s that “The society of experts will control propaganda…all real
power will come to be concentrated in the hands of those who understand the art
of scientific manipulation.”[i]
He noted that the population will: “not be allowed to know how its
convictions were generated.”[ii]
Hopefully, this short video will shine some light on how they generate
convictions.
For those of
us who understand the “art of scientific manipulation,” because we’ve
studied the history of those who employ it, the COVID 19 manipulation
could not have been more obvious. Once you know the formula, it’s very easy to
identify: Use the media to convince the population that it faces an imminent apocalyptic
threat, generate as much hysteria as possible, and then implement your desired policies;
policies that, without the hysteria, would have been politically impossible.
At this
point, they’ve already achieved many of their desires, so let’s turn our
attention to one goal that they’ve yet to achieve: Injecting billions of human
beings, multiple times, with a rushed, inadequately tested, unproven
mRNA vaccine. Fortunately, their propaganda formula is less effective in the
age of the internet. Unfortunately, they’ve now identified and addressed this
problem by adding censorship to the mix. And it’s not just Facebook, YouTube and
Twitter.
When my wife
and I moved back to Ohio, somebody invited us to join nextdoor.com. Unlike Facebook,
where you see things that your friends have posted, nextdoor.com periodically
sends an email digest of posts from people who live in and around your
neighborhood. Garage sales, lost cats…recently, somebody found a chicken that flew
the coop…stuff like that. In 8 years, I’ve only gone to the site a handful of
times to comment. Last week was one of them. The post read: Will you get the
COVID vaccine and why?
Clearly, I’m
passionate about this topic, so I was one of the first ones to reply. I wrote:
“No. You couldn't pay me enough to take a rushed mRNA vaccine for a disease
that, in the vast majority of people, has a 99.98% survival rate. (And that's IF
you catch it. Many seem to already have some form of immunity.) Add in the fact
that the vaccine may only reduce symptoms, not prevent infection or
transmission, and the idea of injecting billions of healthy people seems
downright criminal."
So, that was my first post. Let me show some
references to back up my claims. All links will be available in the
description.
*First, my claim that “the vast majority of people have a
99.98% survival rate” is based on information from the CDC and the UN. Some of
you might have seen graphics like this that use CDC data to show the survival
rate based on age: https://www.mediafire.com/view/74pgutm4b7ee8a5/CDC-Survival-rate2.jpg
However, if you want to confirm this on the CDC website, you’ll notice that the CDC presents
their numbers in decimal form, and they focus on the number of people who die
instead of the number of people who survive. https://www.mediafire.com/view/xxhg7luan0ukyuy/CDC-Survival-rate.jpg No problem. To confirm the survival
rate, you only need to do two things: First, convert the CDC’s decimal format
to a percent by moving the decimal point 2 places to
the right. You now
have your infection fatality percentage. Subtract the fatality percent from
100% to see how many people will survive. In this case, 99.997% survive, and in
this case 99.98% survive.
For a little more perspective, 99.98% survival rate
translates to 1 death in 5,000 infected people. I emphasize infected
because it appears that many people are already immune to this due to exposure
to other coronaviruses. It could be that 10,000 need to be exposed for 5,000 to
become infected and for 1 of those people die. Bottom line, contrary to what
the pharma-funded “experts” and media want you to believe, unless you
personally know at least 5,000 people under the age of 50, there’s a good
chance you won’t know a single person in that age group who dies from this. How
many of the planet’s 7.8 billion people are under the age of 50? According to
the UN, about 6 billion.
Here’s that reference. Note that the graph shows figures in thousands, so to
get the actual total, you’ll have to add 3 zeros. https://www.mediafire.com/view/ckdntmilk3mvdca/UN-under-50.jpg
You can run the query yourself here: https://population.un.org/wpp/DataQuery/
Last but not least: Listen for yourself as Fauci admits the vaccine might not prevent infection, but
that’s OK with him as long as it reduces symptoms. https://youtu.be/xYosU50_E3c
And just for fun, here’s the Nobel prize winning biochemist
who invented the PCR test, Kary Mullis, giving his thoughts on Tony Fauci. https://youtu.be/azAeXdIKW3U
It’s a shame Kary died in August of 2019, just before the
so-called “pandemic” was announced. I’m sure he’d have had plenty to say about
how Fauci and his friends have used the PCR test to
“scientifically” create public hysteria.
OK, so when
I first replied under the COVID vaccine thread, only a couple other people had
posted, and they too responded with an emphatic “No way, I’m not taking it.”
However, the next day, somebody responded with a yes. Quoting from his post,
under the question will you take the vaccine and why, he replied.
“Yes, the vaccine will be fully vetted. It will not be
approved if the side effects are worse than the disease. Some people cannot
take the vaccine - babies and those with preexisting conditions. By taking the
vaccine you are not only protecting yourself but many other people…3000 people
are dying every day from Covid-19, that's like a September 11th every day!”
I took my
time and replied with the following:
I'm not trying to be confrontational; you have the right to
believe what you want, but I disagree with your statements. First, the virus
poses no significant risk to the overwhelming majority of the population.
Therefore, the overwhelming majority of the population is not "protecting
themselves" by taking the vaccine. Rather, they're actually putting
themselves at unnecessary risk.
Second, Fauci himself admits that
he'll be happy if the vaccine permits infection, but simply reduces symptoms.
That standard does nothing to protect the people who can’t take the vaccine.
Third, more than 160,000 people die globally every day (about
60 million per year.) Approximately 25 million of that 60 million is made up of
people over 70 years of age. Many of us suspect that they are
"harvesting" from that enormous pool of annual deaths to inflate
COVID numbers. Excess mortality data (and diminished mortality in areas like
the flu), should hopefully tell the story.
Last but not least, there is no way to fully "vet"
or account for potential long-term side effects that this vaccine will cause.
That could easily take 5 years or more. If the risk / benefit makes sense to
you, that is fine. But the idea of coercing healthy people into taking this
vaccine (via restrictions on their movement, employment, insurance, or other
means), is criminal.
We’ve
already covered the survival rate for 6 billion people, and I’ve already shown Fauci’s statement about whether or not the vaccine will
prevent infection, so here’s a graph showing total annual deaths at 7.6 per
thousand…multiply the 2020 population estimate of 7.8 billion by .76% and
divide by 365 to arrive at 160K+ deaths per day. https://www.mediafire.com/view/ie0vr6cxz7o2ije/UN-Annual-Deaths.jpg/file
Regarding the
typical death count in the 70+ age group, this graph from the UN puts the
figure at just over 25 million deaths average per year for those over the age
of 70. The period in this graph is from 2015 to 2020, so to confirm, add the
figures and then divide by 5 to get the total per year. It, too, is displayed
in thousands, so you’ll need to add 3 zeros when you’re done. https://www.mediafire.com/view/v22fmjy5vtc0vw1/Deaths-over-70.jpg/file
Now would be
a good time to point out that all of the hysteria, censorship, economic
destruction, nationwide lockdowns, curfews, privacy violations and threats of
mandatory vaccination have been justified based on the world reaching its normal
yearly death count on December 20th 2020, instead of December 31st.
And again, that assumes the 1.7 million COVID
fatalities they’re claiming haven’t been harvested mostly from the 25 million
deaths that occur every year in the 70+ age group alone.
Moving on:
After
posting my reply, I saved what I wrote to my computer, and I also saved the
post that I’d replied to, and I’m glad I did. I’m sure you know where this is
going. The entire thread was deleted.
The last
time I looked at the thread, approximately 15 people had responded. Only 3 had
replied “yes, I’m going to take the vaccine” so it was 4 “no’s”
for every 1 “yes.” Just like the first reply that I responded to, the other
“yes” replies repeated the standard “messaging” of mainstream news. “We need to
trust the science,” and “don’t listen to conspiracy theories,” and “with the
vaccine, we’ll be able to get back to normal.” With that said, I want to expose
this idea of media-directed messaging, because it is just another term for
scientifically crafted propaganda.
The obvious
message, drilled relentlessly into our heads, is that we all face an ominous threat.
A threat so great, that it warrants 24 / 7 news coverage and unprecedented
governmental intervention. Slightly less obvious is the idea that we’re to
trust, without question, the corporate-funded, agenda-driven experts that the
media puts in front of us. This tiny group of media-approved experts is not
superior in any way to the far-larger group of dissenting experts. In fact, you
could easily argue that the tiny group is inferior. Because their job, as Kary
Mullis noted, is to say what they’re told to say. Their job is to create and
maintain the illusion of consensus. If they value their prestigious positions
at the WHO, the CDC, the NIH and other institutes, they will not publicly
challenge the official narrative. By design, that narrative contains no context
that will lead to unwanted conclusions.
In pursuit
of “scientific manipulation,” society has been trained to accept media propaganda
for reality. The screen says there’s a new killer mercilessly ravaging the earth,
and they believe…they’ve lost the confidence to turn their back on that screen
and, using their own judgement, compare its claims to the reality that they
actually live in. If they could just do that, if they could turn away long
enough, they’d realize that the world they live in bears no resemblance to the
24-hour fear porn they’re subjected to.
Right now,
we’re at a stage where they want to manipulate you into taking an unproven and
inadequately tested vaccine. A vaccine that doesn’t even promise to keep you
from becoming infected or from infecting others. How can they possibly manage
to pull that off? Well, we’ve already covered that. They intend to manipulate
you with a combination of “messaging” and censorship. If want to dig a little
deeper, you can read some “messages” that Yale university is testing on the
public. I’ll cover a few here. Tell me if they sound familiar:
The Guilt
message
This message is about “the danger that COVID-19 presents to the health of one's
family and community. The best way to protect them is by getting vaccinated and
society must work together to get enough people vaccinated. Then it asks the
participant to imagine the guilt they will feel if they don't get vaccinated
and spread the disease.”
Can you
count the manipulations in that short paragraph? First, we’ve already covered
that COVID 19 isn’t a threat to the vast majority of human beings, which
includes the human beings in your family and community. Second, they claim the
best way to protect your family and community is via vaccination. (If out of
10,000 people, 9,990 face no serious risk, then you are only exposing those 9,990
people to unnecessary risk. As for the other 10 who may be at risk, it’s
up to them to decide whether, best case, “reduced symptoms” are a sufficient
payoff for taking an unproven mRNA vaccine. Especially when other treatments,
buried by the media propaganda and censorship, are available…Finally, as with
most propaganda, they threaten exclusion from the circle of “good, smart,
brave, proud” people, who did as they were told. You’re either with the good
guys who are working to get everyone vaccinated, or you’ll be relegated to the
status of a filthy / guilt-ridden spreader. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04460703
Personal
freedom message
“COVID-19 is limiting people's personal freedom and by working together to get
enough people vaccinated society can preserve its personal freedom.” First of
all, COVID 19 isn’t limiting personal freedom, rather, it’s being used as a
pretext to limit personal freedom, that’s an important distinction. And the idea
that vaccination “preserves” freedom is just bizarre. At best, they’re saying
that you must surrender your freedom to decide for yourself, then, if you do
that, maybe they’ll give back some of what they’ve taken. How is that
preserving freedom?
I’ll just
cover one more, but I’ll link to the study’s page in the description. Here we
have the
The “Trust
in science” message
“…getting vaccinated against COVID-19 is the most effective way of protecting
one's community. Vaccination is backed by science. If one doesn't get
vaccinated that means that one doesn't understand how infections are spread or
who ignores science.” Well, you wouldn’t want to ignore “the science!” that our
scientific manipulators have chosen to put before us. Pay no mind to the 10’s
of thousands of other doctors and scientists who are risking their careers (and
of course, being censored), for challenging this insanity.
On that
note, let’s wrap this up with a reminder from Robert Kennedy Jr. about the
history of those who not only produce these drugs, but fund the only
institutions and “experts” that you’re allowed to hear from.
