top of page
Search

THE SNEAKY GLOBAL COUP - PART 2 - THE ORGANISED CONSPIRACY

Updated: Jun 12





Recap

In the previous post, we examined the profound contrast between what science suggests about how to handle the Covid pandemic, and how it is actually being handled. The data is clear: Covid policies contradict what science says is in the best interests of public health, and we are being lied to. That's why a large and growing numbers of scientists, medical specialists and health practitioners from the likes of Stanford, the Harvard Medical Faculty, John Hopkins Hospital, Yale, etc and some of the biggest associations of medical professionals have been sounding the alarm for over a year.


How do we explain the disconnect between science and Covid policies?

So that multifaceted disconnect between the science and the anti-scientific policies enacted by not one but a baffling number of health agencies, national governments, state actors, and countless businesses is 'the data'. What theory best explains 'the data'?


Hypothesis 1 - Conspiracy | /kənˈspɪrəsi/ | noun: 'secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.'


There are many conspiracy theories circulating in the social media, ranging from the 'alien elite super race working to depopulate the earth' conspiracy, to the more run of the mill theory that Big Pharma has essentially bought enough senior officials and organisations to perpetuate this highly profitable crime against humanity (an established practice, merely at a larger scale than before!). Key points vary dramatically (the who? and why? theories, many details -like vaccine contents and dangers, and whether the vaccines themselves are even an issue - and degree of factual basis with evidence), but at the heart is a shared pattern of explanation summarised by the term 'organised conspiracy'.


Hypothesis #2 - Situational incompetence: Some kind soul suggested that perhaps it is just the outcome of human bureaucrats making big decisions with huge stakes under time pressure and with limited data (on Covid's spread and lethalness, vaccine efficacy and safety, other treatment methods, etc). After all, its easy to criticize decisions made under pressure, in a hurry, with limited data in retrospect and from our arm chairs.


So which hypothesis has greater explanatory power for the data?

HYPOTHESIS #1: An organised conspiracy?

OR

HYPOTHESIS #2: The situational incompetence described above?

We have a really effective way of testing which of the above 2 hypotheses better explains the data. If this whole Covid drama playing out as a train wreck in slow motion is just a series of understandable mistakes by various actors 'playing their role' best they can under the circumstances, then we would expect to see them taking decisions and actions more or less in line with their mission and rule set (e.g. journalists applying established norms of journalistic ethics; business applying the profit motive and corporate citizenship in familiar ways; etc). In contrast, if this is an orchestrated conspiracy, we would instead expect to see an alarming frequency of institutional actors across spheres of society taking decisions and actions that defy logic and norms, in a non-random way (i.e. having a kind of uniformity of direction).


So let's do the analysis.


Lets start by identifying the actors in this drama. The most prominent seem to have been: (1) The World Health Organisation; (2) National public health authorities (e.g. the FDA in the USA); (3) The scientific and medical community; (4) Big Tech (especially, information organisations like Google, Facebook, et al); (5) Big Media, especially news outlets; (6) National and state governments (e.g. the Biden administration); (7) Big Business in general (global banks, etc).


We are testing for 2 main things:

1. Internal congruence - congruence between a mission and mandate aligned response (in light of the science and their role in society and historical normative principles of operation), and their actual response. Congruence suggests 'all is well' (even if we don't like it); occasional internal incongruence is normal; sustained, glaring incongruence is a red flag for malfeasance.

2. Randomness vs. consistency - is incongruence random across time, actors/organizations, and nations, or more uniform? Randomness suggests human error; consistency suggests orchestration.


IF we find evidence of: EITHER internal congruence, OR randomness of incongruence THEN, we have proven Hypothesis 2 has stronger support.

But,

IF we find evidence of BOTH internal incongruence AND consistency of that incongruence across time, actors, and nations,

THEN, we have proven Hypothesis 1 has stronger support. .


Now below is by no means a robust analysis. But it is sufficient to lay bare the obvious.


First follows a brief summary.

NOTES:

  1. The more detailed analysis with linked sources follows at the bottom of this post, if you have the appetite for it.

  2. 'The science' against which we evaluate these actors' policies and actions is covered here.


SUMMARY

TEST 1: INTERNAL CONGRUENCE

ACTOR

INTERNAL CONGRUENCE?

KEY OBSERVATIONS

​(1) The World Health Organisation


ree

  • Discredit early treatment protocols and dismiss natural immunity, thus eliminating all alternatives to mass vaccination

  • Support vaccinating children despite lack of scientific basis and all-risk, zero benefit scenario

(2) National public health authorities (e.g. the FDA in the USA)


ree

  • Exaggerate Covid severity by manipulating data, and suppress age-related mortality data, thus inducing fear

  • Block early treatment protocols and dismiss natural immunity, thus eliminating all alternatives to vaccination

  • Perpetuate lies that Covid vaccines are safe (implying, by normal standards), without declaring lack of long term safety data, or reported dangers

(3) The scientific and medical community


ree

  • Suppress and censor scientific debate

  • Discredit early treatment protocols and dismiss natural immunity; punish dissenting expert voices (e.g. revoke license to operate, fire, remove from office, etc); thus eliminating all alternatives to vaccination

  • Perpetuate lies that Covid vaccines are safe (implying, by normal scientific standards), without acknowledging lack of long term safety data or record levels of adverse effects and deaths

(4) Big Tech (especially, information organisations like Google, Facebook, et al)


ree

  • Censor and suppress dissenting scientific voices and points (deplatform, hide through algorithms that suppress dissenting data and voices, 'fact checking' of dissident experts by non-experts etc)

​(5) Big Media, especially news outlets


ree

  • Abandoned independent journalism, aligned to 'The Trusted News Initiative' propaganda engine which systematically eliminates all alternatives to mass vaccination

  • Aggressively propagate misinformation and disinformation to discredit early treatment protocols and natural immunity; punish dissenting expert voices; thus eliminating all alternatives to vaccination

  • Perpetuate lies that Covid vaccines are safe (implying, by normal standards), without acknowledging lack of long term safety data or record levels of adverse effects and deaths

  • Manufacture illusion of scientific consensus around 'Covid Orthodoxy' by censoring and discrediting dissenting scientific voices and points (e.g. publish hit-pieces)

  • Manufacture illusion of public unity around 'Covid Orthodoxy' (including vaccine mandates) through media blackouts on enormous global protests

​(6) National and state governments (e.g. the Biden administration)


ree

  • Imposed catastrophically costly, failed and scientifically discredited measures like lockdowns and mask mandates

  • Ignore a cacophony of dissenting scientific voices, stick to 'Covid Orthodoxy' despite obvious departure from the science

  • Impose / drive towards / support Vaccine Mandates, ignoring natural immunity

  • All of above despite cost to society, economy, trust in the State, and likely massive loss of voter support

​(7) Vaccine Mandate Big Business


ree

  • Proactively drive Vaccine Mandates, ignoring natural immunity, and perpetuate unscientific discrimination between vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, despite alienating customers and staff and perpetuating injustice

All these actors demonstrate profound internal incongruence. In general, they are following the same 'Covid Orthodoxy' - ultimately, playing their part to drive towards 100% vaccination with experimental Covid vaccines as fast as their stakeholders will allow them to go - in stark contradiction to the science (especially regarding natural immunity, alternative treatments, and vaccinating children, but also regarding the ineffectiveness of mask mandates and lockdowns) and the fundamental principles that theoretically govern their policies and actions.



TEST 2: RANDOMNESS vs. CONSISTENCY

The internal incongruence of these actors is not random. While there is obviously nuance and diversity in responses, there is a much stronger signal of consistency on a handful of key issues which indicates background orchestration, in 3 ways:

  1. First, it is aligned across nations and actors in a way that is contrary to science and logic. All these actors are striving (even when such action contradicts the science and their operating norms) relentlessly to eliminate all alternatives to vaccination (e.g. effective alternative early treatments, natural immunity, endemic progression) and driving towards mass, mandatory vaccination and vaccine passports.

  2. Secondly, it is remarkably synchronous, or taking place in 'lockstep' (in line with the 'Lockstep scenario' developed by the World Economic Forum for a pandemic just like this).

  3. Third, it is steadfast in direction over time, headed relentlessly towards mandatory mass vaccination, vaccine passports, and vaccine-apartheid societies regardless of changes in the scientific data which demand a change in approach (e.g. ignore avalanche of data proving effectiveness of early treatment protocols and natural immunity, dominance of prior infection in populations resulting in populations being already protected and not requiring mass vaccination, and declining risk posed by less dangerous new strains like Omicron which justifies eliminating costly interventions like lockdowns and certainly backing off from vaccine mandates)


CONCLUSION

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it is probably a....?


We find strong evidence of BOTH internal incongruence AND consistency of that incongruence across time, actors, and nations, so we must conclude Hypothesis 1 has stronger support. Hypothesis 2 is simply not credible. The data is clear, the pattern is obvious. The disconnect between science and policy is not a random set of mis-steps explained by pressure, urgency, lack of data, and human decision-making. Rather, there is a clear pattern of the most powerful actors in this Covid drama acting contrary to their core mandates and norms on a handful of critical issues, in a synchronized manner, in support of the specific agenda of getting 100% of the population vaccinated and included in a digital vaccine passport (and ID) system. They appear to be acting in chorus, with the following agenda:

  1. MANUFACTURE FEAR: Fear is a great controlling device. After love, fear is the most powerful way to control people. But love can't be manufactured and fear can. Furthermore, campaigns to induce fear in the broader population (e.g. by sustaining a continuous campaign of misleading and terrifying reporting about an invisible, omnipresent, deadly threat, complimented by jarring symbols and rituals of crisis and danger, like masks and posters everywhere and lockdowns and school closures) have been proven to be effective at inducing a state of 'mass hypnosis' by skilled social engineers and enabling mass social control.

  2. REPLACE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE WITH AUTOCRATIC RULE: Declare a state of disaster to justify 'temporary' emergency ruling bodies and powers. Use those powers to bypass democratic processes, short-circuit checks and balances, suspend individual rights and freedoms, force through new laws (e.g. censorship, mass surveillance, legalizing forced quarantine in quarantine camps, etc), impose police states, etc.

  3. CREATE DESPERATION FOR RESOLUTION: Sustain painful circumstances (lockdowns, school closures, ban alcohol and leisure, close businesses and cause job losses etc) to motivate compliance with measures required to 'return normalcy'. Frame the situation as “we need everybody to get vaccinated to end lockdowns and open our economies” (though this is an obvious butchering of the facts to justify state and big business coercion and engineer public coercion).

  4. ELIMINATE VACCINE ALTERNATIVES: Discredit, ban, stigmatise and deny alternatives to vaccination (infection-induced immunity, early treatment with proven anti-viral therapies);

  5. AGGRESSIVELY DRIVE 100% VACCINATION STRATEGY: drive for mass vaccination; eliminate all barriers (pay for them, get a free KFC voucher, bring the vaccine to you, etc); harness tools of mass psychological manipulation to compel vaccination; continuously move the goalposts so that 'just 1 more action' leads to freedom, continuously; punish non-compliant; ratchet up pressure until 100% compliance achieved.


ree

We must make 3 observations about the above findings, and the implications.


[1] This is a coup. This orchestrated conspiracy constitutes no less than an effective coup:

  • Replacement of democratic governments and processes with 'state of emergency' autocratic ruling structures that amount to unelected medical dictatorships.

  • Replacement of national independence and sovereignty with a global medical tyranny that seems to dictate to nations (e.g. how South Africa has been bullied into implementing Vaccine Mandates in order to rescue our aviation and tourism sectors). Sure, our national governments remain in place, but hidden actors now have the power to ensure we are all forced to get injected with Covid vaccines and get vaccine passports or get excluded from our new vaccine apartheid societies.

  • Hijacking of some of the most powerful institutions that govern our societies (e.g. local health regulators by the international healthcare mafia, local media by the international 'Trusted News Initiative' media control body, big business by international shareholders with an agenda).

  • Hijacking 'policy definition and implementation' (e.g. vaccine mandates) - typically the domain of government - by Big Business interests aligned to the global Covid agenda.

  • Suppression of individual rights and freedoms enshrined in democratic constitutions, by emergency laws and growing police states.

[2] It is a global coup: for the first time in history, we are witnessing an attempted (hidden, deceitful) coup of most nations concurrently.


[3] It is being perpetrated by means of deception. Most people still think we live in democracies, where our trusty governments and the other powerful actors are fighting Covid for our safety, and that their democratically elected officials are making decisions in the interests of public health and wellbeing. They have no idea this pandemic is merely the cloak veiling a take-over of our free and democratic societies by autocrats with an agenda. They are stuck in the Matrix carrying on with their lives oblivious to the power transfer that is happening under our noses because its all been cloaked in the Covid narrative, dutifully propagated by the captured media and big tech, and parroted by captured officials and big business spokesmen.


A global coup, effected by deception. Just like the coming white horse rider in Revelation Ch 6. That is what we are living through, and that is why we should be paying profound attention to how this all unfolds...


Psalm 2 1 Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying, 3 “Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us.” 4 He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord holds them in derision. 5 Then he will speak to them in his wrath, and terrify them in his fury, saying, 6 “As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill.” 7 I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you. 8 Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession. 9 You shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” 10 Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth. 11 Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.


Maranatha. Come Lord Jesus.



DETAILED ANALYSIS

Click any arrow below to expand header and read more.


1. The World Health Organisation

"We champion health and a better future for all. Dedicated to the well-being of all people and guided by science, the World Health Organization leads and champions global efforts to give everyone, everywhere an equal chance to live a healthy life. (https://www.who.int/about)

So, lets see...


They should (logical, coherent course of action)

· Align pandemic management guidance to the time-tested respiratory virus pandemic management strategies

· ​Bring perspective: accurately convey the degree of Covid health risk to different segments of the population, relative to risk and reward of treatment options and pandemic management strategies. E.g. emphasize that in most countries the average Covid age of death is >80 years old, that 4999 / 5000 healthy people <50yrs old recover from Covid, and that children face almost zero risk (less than flu), and therefore pandemic management strategies should not create much more harm than the harm they seek to avoid.

· Take a balanced approach to vaccines. Robustly test safety and efficacy; pressure-test Big Pharma clinical trials; follow strict scientific principles that reveal the danger of mass-vaccination with a 'leaky vaccine' with very narrow range of operation in the midst of a pandemic

· ​Promoteearly treatment protocols with proven efficacy and massive successes.

· ​Definitely discourage child vaccination in the case of Covid vaccines

· Promote harnessing infection-induced immunity as central to pandemic management policy.


They do (actual response)

· To their credit, they have been somewhat balanced in their recommendations regarding mask-mandates and lockdown policies. But as the WHO, they have a duty to actively denounce unscientific, harmful national policies. They have not.

· Supported misrepresentation of the true danger Covid poses, thus justifying extreme and unjustified policies like lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates, vaccine mandates etc. that create more harm (loss of livelihoods, extraordinary suffering, compromised mental wellness, skyrocketing excess all-cause mortality from undiagnosed and treated illnesses and suicides, domestic violence, etc; lost educational years for children, etc) than the harm they avoid (death of a small percentage of mostly old and sick people).

· Epicenter agent responsible for propagating a single-minded 'vaccinate everybody' policy, by 1. Failing to interrogate Big Pharma vaccine clinical trial studies, e.g. did not expose flimsy efficacy data based on which efficacy results marketed to the public were derived;

· 2. Overselling the Covid vaccines (disproportionate to the available evidence on efficacy, safety, durability, and resilience in the face of variants), including lying (stating vaccines are as safe as other approved vaccines, a complete lie, for 3 reasons: (1) they don't have any data on long term safety for the Covid vaccines, they do have it for other vaccines; (2) other vaccines use amply tried and testing underlying technology, Covid vaccines use new technology that has always failed clinical trials for safety reasons in the past; (3) Covid vaccine injuries and deaths exceed those for all other vaccines combined) 3. Discrediting proven alternative treatments like HCQ and Ivermectin. 4. Discrediting and denying a role for infection-induced immunity,

· Discredited proven early treatment protocols with clinically proven effectiveness and significant research support, like HCQ and Ivermectin.

· ​Promote vaccinating even children, misrepresenting the benefit/risk reality for children who face almost zero fatality risk and have a very limited role in transmission (also here, and here), despite the all risk, no benefit scenario for kids.

· Discrediting and denying a role for infection-induced immunity, including deleting it from their website as a recognised mechanism for achieving herd immunity (until they were pressurised sufficiently to return to scientific sanity!)


Congruence test:FAIL. Action is incongruent with their mandate and norms


Direction of incongruence Their incongruent decisions and actions specifically support mass vaccination as the central disease management strategy, and circumventing health policies that would undermine mass vaccination, like alternative early treatments and natural immunity

2. National public health authorities and regulators

(e.g. the FDA, CDC, NIH in the USA) These are some of the real devils in the overall scandal. These health agencies have violated their duty to protect public health, and been key enablers of other actors (national governments, big business) doing the same. Let's use the example of the USA's FDA to define the gist of the mandate of these national health agencies: The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. (https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/what-we-do). Ensure the safety and efficacy of drugs. Right. Let's see. Congruent / Logical responses

  • Provide balanced, accurate data on the nature and severity of the pandemic and best measures to manage the pandemic.

  • Expedite approval of and support mass roll-out of proven, effective alternative therapeutic treatments

  • Robustly test safety and efficacy of vaccines; pressure-test Big Pharma clinical trials; expose weaknesses.

  • Monitor safety and efficacy outcomes and apply historical thresholds for vaccines to maintaining / cancelling approval status for vaccines.

  • Respect public right to information regarding vaccine safety and efficacy data.

  • Celebrate findings regarding effectiveness and durability of infection-induced immunity and incorporate into policy. Treat the infection-recovered in line with science: as though they have superior immune response to the vaccinated.

  • Reject approval of vaccines for children, based on it being unnecessary and unethical since most children stand to gain no protection, but face unnecessary risk of dire and irreversible harm.

Actual responses Here we will focus on the USA's NIH, FDA and CDC, as exemplars of the pattern of typical (with exceptions) national health agency Covid responses around the world.


ree


ree

ree

But instead of leading the charge of investigations, national health regulators are acting like the marketing department for Big Pharma, deflecting interrogation of vaccine safety and efficacy and demonising those asking questions. Regulators tend to say things like "there is no evidence linking VAERS deaths directly to Covid vaccines". Mmm... really?


ree

Public Health England for example continue to mislead by publishing a mere 1500 odd Vaccine deaths, when ONS data shows the number is closer to 36000 (By Nov 2021). They mislead by using unequal weights and measures. In the case of Covid deaths, they attribute ANY death within 28 days of a positive Covid test as a 'Covid death' (even in the case of fatal head wounds and car accidents). If they were to be consistent, they would count any death within 28 days of a Covid jab as a 'vaccine death'. But in the case of vaccines, of course, they don't do that. Of course they have good reasons for this difference in approach (which I am sure amply explains counting a fatal head wound as a 'Covid death'). Examples of Public Health Agencies deceiving the public through manipulation of Covid statistics is unfortunately widespread. A frustrating example is how, in South Africa, data on ICU beds taken up by the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated continues to tell the story of the unvaccinated filling hospitals, but the data counts everybody who has not had 2 jabs at least 14 days ago 'unvaccinated', including somebody who got their second shot yesterday and then keeled over with heart problems.

Congruence test? No. Action is incongruent with their mandate and norms. The act more like the propaganda and public policy arm of Pfizer than public health agencies. That is why medical professionals have lost trust in these agencies. and are gathering in large numbers to formulate alternative approaches to Covid treatment and call out corruption of the health agencies. Direction of incongruence Like the WHO, their incongruent decisions and actions specifically support mass vaccination as the central disease management strategy, and circumventing health policies that would undermine mass vaccination, like alternative treatments and natural immunity. In addition through, they typically push policies like mask mandates and lockdowns which have the effect of blackmailing populations into mass vaccination, as they cause widespread harm and - they promise us - will go away when everybody is vaccinated.

3. The scientific and medical community

"Science is about rational disagreement, the questioning and testing of orthodoxy and the constant search for truth." Scientific integrity requires free debate and the pursuit of theories / explanations / truths that best explain (and withstand the assault of challenges from) the empirical evidence. So we would expect - with so much at stake in this Covid pandemic - that the scientific community, especially the most relevant fields of epidemiology, virology, immunology, cardiology, etc, to: Congruent / logical responses

  • Openly debate all the big questions. Do lockdowns work? Do masks work? Are these particular EUA approved vaccines effective and safe, and for whom does the benefit far exceed the risk (and for whom does it not)? Etc.

  • Be more vigilant than ever about scientific integrity

  • Challenge politicians and other actors that deviate from policies which science supports.

  • Celebrate breakthrough findings, even when they disprove prior views and positions.

  • Staunchly defend the principles of the Nuremberg Code, insisting on full transparency of vaccine safety and efficacy data, and vocally rejecting public coercion to ensure the principle of free and informed consent is upheld.

Actual responses


ree

  • While there has been an encouraging frenzy of scientific inquiry and published findings on many of the key questions, it is also evident that scientists and medical doctors are being heavily censored (example here), bullied into supporting the mainstream policy narrative, or risk losing funding, jobs, license to practice. It seems there is a war taking place inside top institutions, to silence dissenting scientific voices. And this war seems to be pervading all scientific and expert thinking on how to manage the Covid pandemic. "Devastating brutal attacks on scientific dissent ... about lockdown type policies, whereby... dissenters and contrarians... who raise questions about the clearly flawed and failed lockdown policies (including those regarding vaccine mandates especially for children and the denial of early outpatient treatment), are smeared and attacked by the media and by ex cathedra academic and medical peers, including universities, and now, by the scientific journal publishing domain"Dissonant voices are simply suppressed. This includes error-laden hit-pieces being published in previously reputable scientific and medical journals to reign in the dissonant. Why is such suppression and censorship necessary if the science is so clear? The irony is that society is told to 'follow the science' and get vaccinated, but they are forced to censor scientists and dismantle the scientific discipline of critical inquiry to maintain the façade of scientific clarity and consensus!

  • Scientists, researchers and healthcare professionals have been pressurized to commit to conform to the 'orthodox' / consensus approach to pandemic management (the John Snowden Memorandum), including supporting lockdowns, denying the role of natural immunity, and several other scientifically disproven tactics, because 'we don't have time for the distraction' of debating these 'proven approaches'. Again, this is anti-science. Why is this necessary if the science is so clear?

  • Doctors and nurses have been pressurized to remain silent about vaccine adverse effects, to or risk deregistration and consequently permanently losing their livelihoods (e.g. 11 nurses testifying here). Why is this necessary if the vaccines are so safe?

  • As a result and as the brave, vocal scientists and medical professionals have observed the majority of the scientific and medical community are simply being silent or parroting orthodoxy despite the many scientific fallacies and falsehoods: lockdowns, masks, vaccines, no early / alternative treatment. This effect is made to seem like 'medical and scientific consensus' by the mainstream media and Big Tech's active censorship of dissenting opinions, as we shall see below. Contrary to the false image created by the MSM and BigTech, huge numbers of brave souls in this community (for example, here and here and here) have not allowed the censorship and bullying to rob them of their integrity and conscience, even though many have actually or effectively ended their careers for challenging the propaganda with science.

  • The community as a whole have been silent as (for example): (1) the evidence for the robustness of natural immunity has become unequivocal and revealed the absence of scientific grounds for the universal vaccination program, (2) overwhelming evidence has supported the efficacy of early treatment protocols, rendering emergency approved vaccines unnecessary and illegal; (3) politicians have increasingly coerced their populations to take vaccines with diabolically evil tactics like firing people who decline the vaccine ('no jab, no job'), and as nations now explore mandatory vaccination under pain of enormous fines (for people who already are out of a job).

Congruence test? No. Action is grossly incongruent with the values and norms of the scientific community. Direction of incongruence: This crucial scientific and medical expert community is obviously diverse and responses have been diverse, but considered as a whole the community has served as a primary propagator of Covid propaganda and censor of dissenting views including amongst experts. Through their suppression of scientific debate and support of Covid propaganda they have circumvented health policies that would undermine mass vaccination, like employing proven alternative treatments and recognizing and harnessing natural immunity.


4. Big Tech

(especially, the dominant information organisations like Google, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Linkedin, et al) As platforms designed to democratize publishing and distribution of content, except for the most offensive (e.g. terrorist acts), with business models designed to serve all of society and enable free expression of pluralistic views, one would expect BigTech platforms like Facebook, Youttube, etc to: Logical responses

  • Continue to operate as neutral platforms, providing society with a free flow of information from diverse voices, uncensored. Stated in the negative, not 'take a view' and censor dissenting voices

  • Certainly, enable scientific debate by simply not getting in the way by censoring scientists and specialists with views that deviate from orthodoxy.

  • Internally, fight discrimination and inequality (as 'Left-dominated' organisations that embrace critical race theory and its cultural tenets)

  • Be 'pro-choice', not 'pro-conformance' (as 'Left-dominated' organisations that are 'pro-choice', not 'pro-life' in the abortion debate)

Actual responses

Sure, this censorship by BigTech is not new. According to WSJ, Big Tech has unofficially been the Left political machine's censorship arm since Pres. Donald Trump came to office. But it is one thing to censor a political opponent not terribly inclined toward grounding statements in science and fact, and another thing entirely to censor world-leading scientists in the midst of scientific debate of immense importance to the future of humanity, not only because it affects the future trajectory of the Covid pandemic, but because it affects the future of democracy and freedom.

  • Instead of fighting discrimination and inequality within their organisations (as bastions of left-leaning culture), they are leading the charge in discriminating against the unvaccinated (1, 2, 3) contrary to the science in at least 3 ways: (1) don't recognize infection-induced immunity protects against transmission; (2) don't recognize that the vaccinated transmit just like the unvaccinated; (3) don't recognize infection-induced immunity is actually more protective than vaccine-induced, for society.

  • Have been primary propagators of mass vaccination propaganda

Congruence test? No. Action is incongruent with their mandate and norms Direction of incongruence: BigTech has served as a primary propagator of Covid propaganda, and censor of dissenting views including amongst globally leading scientists. Through their propaganda distribution and censorship, they create the illusion of scientific consensus regarding mass-vaccination as the most effective disease management strategy, and actively circumvent health policies that would undermine mass vaccination, like employing proven alternative treatments and recognizing and harnessing natural immunity. They similarly create the illusion of the scientific legitimacy and necessity of mask mandates, lockdowns, and vaccine mandates, thereby legitimizing Government's and Big Business' main weapons to coerce the vaccine hesitant into being vaccinated against their will.

5. Big Media, especially news outlets

We would assume the journalistic code of ethics would apply, which almost universally include the principles of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability, as outlined in for example the Global charter of ethics for journalists here. Note the first rule: "Respect for the facts and for the right of the public to truth is the first duty of the journalist." Logical responses

  • Maintain journalistic independence, not beholden to any stakeholders, protecting ability to report neutrally, objectively, having weighed all arguments and evidence thoroughly.

  • Report all worthy and relevant news and viewpoints in the public interest, with associated credibility and evidence.

  • Report all evidence in an unbiased, accurate manner.

  • When opposing viewpoints emerge from credible scientific and medical voices (like one of the world's foremost experts in mRNA technology, one of the world's most published cardiologists, Harvard, Yale, John Hopkins and Stanford professors) on the most critical issues pertaining to pandemic management strategy (like alternative treatments, vaccine safety, natural immunity, lockdowns, school closures, vaccine mandates): air the opposing views, facilitate live, structured debates by PHd's with opposing views, investigate factors contributing to the disagreements, and provide continuous commentary on the state of the debate as new evidence emerges.

Actual responses

  1. Silenced the 'lab leak' source of virus theory - discredited the 'lab leak' theory and those suggesting it requires investigation, even though today it is thought to be the most likely explanation for the origin of the virus.

  2. Driven effective early treatment protocols underground in medical circles by spreading disinformation about therapies like HCQ and Ivermectin, and ridiculing as unscientific medical heretics all doctors promoting and administering proven alternative treatments. Have dismissed the avalanche of clinical evidence supporting the effectiveness as anecdotal and inconsequential, and suppressed and dismissed the significant peer-reviewed research supporting the same. For example, CNN has outright lied to portray Ivermectin as a horse dewormer only, to stigmatise use of this proven treatment.

  3. Silenced the voices of dissenting, globally leading health professionals, including discrediting and defaming them (e.g. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, epidemiologist, Stanford University; Dr. Sunetra Gupta, infectious disease epidemiologist, Oxford Univ.; Dr. Martin Kulldorff, epidemiologist, Harvard; Dr. Robert W. Malone, inventor of mRNA technology platform; Dr. Peter A. McCullough, former Vice-Chair Int. Med., Baylor Univ.; Dr. Didier Raoult, microbiologist and director, IHU Méditerranée Infection; Professor at Aix Marseille Université; Dr. Harvey A. Risch, Prof. Epid., Yale School of Public Health; Dr. Knut M. Wittkowski, biometrician, 20-year head, biostatistics/epid., Rockefeller University; Dr. Michael Yeadon, former VP of respiratory research, Pfizer)

  4. Made adverse effects and vaccine deaths seem extremely rare by throttling reporting on serious post-vaccine side effects and deaths and taking active measures to prevent any such reporting or testimonies on in news outlets, despite record events. For example > At least 75 professional athletes in Europe (i.e. the fittest and healthiest demographic in the world!) have collapsed or died on the field since vaccine roll-out began. This is completely unprecedented in history. One would think MSM would pick up on this story, investigate, and report. But it is left to small independent and citizen journalists to do this reporting. Those relying on MSM have no idea. > There were more reported deaths and adverse effects from the Covid vaccine in the first 6 months post-roll out than all other vaccines in the last 30 years, combined. Most people do not know this > Vaccine safety is most commonly based on reported adverse effects. But it is a fact that deaths and adverse effects are dramatically under-reported, conservatively by a factor of 5x. Thus, risks are de facto understated.

  5. Consistently deceived through manipulative use of statistics. See here a short e-book summarised prominent examples of CNN's misleading reporting

  6. Censored messages about natural immunity being stronger than vaccinated immunity. E.g. when the largest study in history comparing infection-induced immunity vs. vaccine-induced immunity demonstrated the former to be significantly superior based on real world data, the MSM were virtually silent on the implications of this for the scientific basis of a mass vaccination strategy in a world where most people already have infection-induced immunity. They continue to discredit natural immunity despite the science. Their silence remains deafening in the face of the avalanche of research validating the same findings.

  7. Censored experts sharing worrying evidence of pathogenic priming/ADE caused by the Covid vaccines.

  8. Created the illusion that Covid is deadly to everybody (vs. almost entirely the very old and sick), by suppressing reports on the central role of co-morbidities in serious Covid disease

  9. Manufactured the illusion of the majority of the population being agreed about the need for everybody to be vaccinated and support vaccine mandates, lockdowns and masing by censoring reporting on the enormous global protests against these policies (which thankfully we know about due to independent smaller channels), and mis-reporting protests as small, far-right extremist rallies of 'uneducated rabid anti-vaxxers'. See here a compilation on protests by hundreds of thousands of people against Covid Tyranny around the world mostly in Nov 2021. Watch this shocking example of the suppression of truth by MSM propaganda engine regarding the November 2021 Melbourne protests, as an example. It is again left to independent small channels and sites to report reality objectively (e.g. here and here). It would not be harsh to say the MSM our outright deceiving their audience.

  10. Propagated the disinformation on Covid being a 'disease of the unvaccinated' as late as Nov 2021 - despite the clear truth that it is the vaccinated filling hospitals and ICU beds (e.g. here in the Lancet, and the UK Vaccine Surveillance report data here showing 71% of adults overnighting in hospital are vaccinated (see Table 4 on page 20), and c20% of Covid deaths are unvaccinated(see table 5a and 5b on page 21-22)).

It is unsurprising then that Dr. Piers Robinson, co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, has judged: “It wouldn’t be an underestimation to say that this is probably one of the biggest propaganda operations that we have seen in history” Congruence test? No. While the cynical would be justified in saying the media has hardly been a trustworthy source of unbiased, accurate news in the public interest for decades, they have at least tried to maintain the illusion of credibility as accurate and neutral sources of news. Their deviation from even the pretense at soundness and neutrality on topics with divergent credible views is incongruent with their mandate and norms . Direction of incongruence: The MSM have served as the primary propagators of Covid propaganda, censors of dissenting views including amongst globally leading scientists, and persecutors of the non-compliant. Like BigTech, through their propaganda and censorship, they create the illusion of scientific consensus regarding mass-vaccination as the most effective disease management strategy, and actively circumvent health policies that would undermine mass vaccination, like employing proven alternative treatments and recognizing and harnessing natural immunity. They similarly create the illusion of the scientific legitimacy and necessity of mask mandates, lockdowns, and vaccine mandates, thereby legitimizing Government's and Big Business' main weapons to coerce the vaccine hesitant into being vaccinated against their will.

6. National and state governments (e.g. the Biden administration)

Here, I’ll focus on 'free democratic states' in the Western mold. A democratic system of government is a one in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them mostly indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodic free elections for the people to select governors with a mandate to direct government in the interests of, on behalf of, and aligned to the mandates of those who elected them. As such, a logical, congruent approach to managing this pandemic by national and state governments would prioritise: protecting the public, protecting and growing the economy, and preserving popularity with voters. How are they doing? While there is clearly enormous diversity amongst national and state responses, there is a bizarre, logic-defying homogeneity on matters of 'Covid Orthodoxy' amongst too many democratic nations (particularly, European states, the UK, North American States (especially Blue ones), Australasia, and South Africa).


1. NPI (Non-Pharmaceutical Intervention) policies:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· Take a balanced approach to managing the Covid pandemic, balancing risk of Covid deaths with other priorities, and assigning risk-adjusted proportionality to Covid measures like lockdowns, mask mandates, and school closures.

· Abandon failed, disastrously costly non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) policies (masks, mask mandates, lockdowns, school closures), based on the mountainous evidence against them, in favour of sound policies (e.g focused protection of the vulnerable, while keeping the economy open and emphasizing early treatment).


​They do (actual responses):

· Taken a completely imbalanced approach to managing the risks presented by Covid, subordinating all other national concerns (like all-cause mortality, livelihoods, community wellbeing, collateral public health damage from Covid restrictions on cardiovascular disease,cancer, diabetes, backsliding childhood vaccinations, starvation and mental health, just to name a few) to the singular concern of preventing Covid deaths.

· Continued to implement failed, catastrophically costly policies including : mask mandates, general lockdowns, school closures.

These have no scientific basis, are harmful to society and economies and public health, and therefore completely incongruent.



2. Dissident expert voices:

They should (logical / congruent responses):


· Investigate divergent but deeply credible expert views on issues such as vaccine mandates, mask mandates, lockdowns, etc, such as those of the scientists behind the Great Barrington Declaration, the Doctors and Scientists declaration, etc. Adjust policies where science and the public interest demands it. Accordingly, cancel policy actions which the science robustly discredits, such as lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccine mandates, and vaccinating children.

​They do:

· Ignore the growing list of globally leading scientists and experts opposed to Covid 'policy orthodoxy' (e.g. Dr Kulldorff from Harvard, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford, Dr McCullough, Dr Robert Malone a pioneer of mRNA vaccine technology, and thousands of others) and the body of science that discredits the antiscientific and hugely costly, risky and therefore unethical policies, in favour of the 'Orthodoxy' that makes no logical sense.

Since 'Orthodoxy' is so unscientific and costly, and dissident expert voices present scientifically superior alternatives, it is completely incongruent that governments ignore them.



3. Natural immunity:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· With typically >70-80% of most Western populations having recovered from Covid already, and infection-induced immunity proven stronger than vaccine-induced immunity, embrace and celebrate the science that shows our populations are largely protected already and adjust vaccination plans to focus on the unprotected. Treat the infection-recovered like the vaccinated (in terms of health and transmission risk

​​They do (actual responses):

· Continue pretending vaccination is the only viable approach to develop immunity, and continue with policies that focus on vaccinating everybody, regardless of prior infection status.

This is deeply suspicious. Ignoring natural immunity is catastrophic, unscientific, harmful to society and public health, and therefore completely incongruent.



4. Transmission risk policies:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· Shift from distinguishing between 'vaccinated vs. unvaccinated', to distinguishing between 'spreaders vs. not spreaders', after the science began showing the truth that vaccination does not reduce transmission since the Delta variant, but natural immunity does, and that a substantial portion of the population had already been infected.

​They do (actual responses):

· Continue to distinguish between 'vaccinated vs. unvaccinated' to distinguishing between 'spreaders vs. not spreaders'.

This has no scientific basis, is harmful to economies, a violation of democratic principles, discriminatory, and therefore completely incongruent.



5. Early treatment therapies:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· Eagerly deploy therapies with significant clinical and research evidence of effectiveness and safety, like HCQ and Ivermectin

​They do (actual responses):

· Inexplicably, banned or knee-capped use of early treatment protocols, at the cost of probably hundreds of thousands of lives (while approving mass roll-out of vaccines with almost zero initial evidence of efficacy or safety, and still absent long term safety data).

There is no basis in science for these Government actions. Reversing this action alone would relieve a significant portion of pressure on constrained hospital beds, save tens of thousands of lives, and end lockdowns. This policy is harmful to economies, a violation of human rights and medical principles, and therefore completely incongruent.


6. Overall strategy:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· Abandon the singular focus on vaccination to contain and manage the Covid virus - augment with other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions - now that we know that (1) high vaccination rates don't lead to reduced spread of Covid and reopening of economies, since vaccination does not prevent infection or transmission; (2) Covid is treatable with cheap, effective therapies.


​They do (actual responses):

· Continue with a single-pronged strategy to end the pandemic: mass vaccination. Ignore other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

This has no scientific basis, is harmful to economies, a violation of democratic principles, and is therefore completely incongruent.


7. Vaccine mandates:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· Fiercely reject them - especially the 'no jab no job version' - as unscientific, unnecessary, and unethical.

​They do (actual responses):

· Nation after nation is imposing vaccine mandates, with increasingly punitive measures to punish the unvaccinated, including the infection-recovered who have very low health risk due to infection-induced immunity and pose low transmission risk for the same reason. European nations are leading the charge, imposing fines and threatening jail time for not being vaccinated, regardless of prior infection. Other nations are following suit.

This has no scientific basis, is harmful to economies, a violation of democratic principles, discriminatory, will cause enormous social upheaval and protests, and catastrophic loss of voter support for from governing parties, and therefore completely incongruent.



8. Vaccinating children:

They should (logical / congruent responses):

· Fiercely reject vaccination of children as absolutely unnecessary and unethical. In contrast to flu, the risk of illness and transmission in children with Covid-19 is low . There is therefore no medical reason for the closure of primary schools or other special measures for children. Vaccinating kids is an all risk, zero benefit policy.


​They do (actual responses):

· While it is early days, the direction of travel has been made clear by the actions of the central actors (WHO, public health agencies, national governments, mainstream media): mass, mandatory vaccination of children. As of November 2021, many national governments are swiftly implementing vaccine policies for children, and headed towards mandatory vaccines despite of parental resistance.

This has no basis in science, is fundamentally evil (all risk, zero benefit for kids), and inexplicable in terms of normal public health principles, given the vaccines have no long term safety data, use a novel unproven technology with alarming safety signals in kids


Congruence test? The actions of these democratically elected governments defy science and logic. They are catastrophically harmful to economies and public wellbeing, a violation of democratic principles, discriminatory, will cause enormous social upheaval and protests, and catastrophic loss of voter support for from governing parties. Blindly following 'covid orthodoxy' (masks, lockdowns, banned early treatment therapies, ignoring infection-induced immunity, singular focus on vaccination, vaccine mandates) in the face of the latest science is completely incongruent with norms for democratic governments, given what the science has revealed about Covid age-related mortality rates, natural immunity, early treatment protocols, and the ineffectiveness and catastrophic costs of lockdowns and mask mandates. Quite simply, these policies are so completely contrary to science and reason, there must be another reason, besides public health, for these policies. Furthermore, they appear to be rolling out 'in lockstep', as per scenarios developed by the World Economic Forum for a 'theoretical' global pandemic.

7. Big Business

Here I will focus on Vaccine Mandate Big Business (VMBB), excluding Big Pharma who's incentives in this saga are quite clear. For the sake of simplicity, I refer below only to the group within Big Business that has taken a pro-vaccine mandate stance and which ignores the role of natural immunity. Hence, Vaccine Mandate Big Business (VMBB). The VMBB actor is easy to analyze. Big businesses are profit-motivated entities. They often (not often enough!) have good leaders who also fully intend to do good. Nevertheless, they must still protect shareholder value creation. Big businesses do not want to lose customers or staff. They do not want supply chain disruptions. They do not higher costs and lower profits. The most inexplicable of all VMBB actions since August 2021 has been to ignore infection-induced immunity and proceed with vaccine mandates, despite the immense cost to business with no obvious upside. Think about it.

  • Big business wants an end to Covid restrictions that result in customers having less money and being less free to buy goods and services, and workers being unable to come to work.

  • To end Covid lockdowns, we require herd immunity.

  • Herd immunity comes through EITHER vaccination OR infection-induced immunity.

  • Since August 2021, the evidence has become overwhelming that infection-induced immunity is stronger than vaccine-induced immunity and most people already have it.

  • If Big Business simply campaigned for science and logic to prevail (recognise infection-induced immunity, convey the same recognition of 'immunity' and safety to the recovered as to the vaccinated), this pandemic would be over.

  • Instead Big Business is complicit in extending the state of disaster that plagues our countries by ignoring infection-induced immunity despite the science and enforcing vaccine mandates on the infection-recovered.

  • This alienates a large portion of their staff and customers, continues the social upheaval and business interruptions, and only presents downside (no upside at all) to most of Big Business.

  • This is quite clearly anti-science and contrary to the profit motive. Only by denying infection-induced immunity - despite the science - can Big Businesses sustain the act that insisting on mass vaccination is the right thing to do and good for business.

Congruence test? No. Action is incongruent with both corporate citizenship and the profit motive. Direction of incongruence? Clearly, to support mandatory mass vaccination, Covid Passports, and a future 'medical apartheid' society.

SUMMARY

All these actors, in general, are following the same 'Covid Orthodoxy' - ultimately, playing their part to drive towards 100% vaccination with experimental Covid vaccines - in stark contradiction to the science (especially regarding natural immunity and alternative treatments, but also regarding the ineffectiveness of mask mandates and lockdowns) and the fundamental principles that theoretically govern their policies and actions.



RECENT POSTS




Comments

Couldn’t Load Comments
It looks like there was a technical problem. Try reconnecting or refreshing the page.

©2020 by The Revelation of Christ

bottom of page