If given the choice between maintaining a toxic world of fear, pollution and violence controlled by the State or a society of prosperity and compassion based on freedom and individual rights, there is little doubt that the majority of Americans would want the old paradigm of synthetic events to take a hike; except that choice has been distorted under the guise of what the World Health Organization (WHO) has mislabeled the most deadly virus in history.
The coronavirus crisis arrived in a flash with little time to analyze exactly WTF was going on. Americans struggled to process what is real, trustworthy and authentic as the unraveling of deep political decay revealed a behind-the-scenes subterranean power struggle that has surfaced with the intent on disintegration of American Society.
While the country is fast approaching an existential crisis on steroids, millions experienced an inner knowing that some indefinable thing was not right with recognition that the early explanations were hogwash while others, addicted to mainstream/social media who still believed in the illusion of democracy, were on board with the litany of spin from the medical and political establishment.
While the Lockdown could have been a wake up call for humanity to change its consciousness with a paradigm shift – whether it be a spiritual awakening, a political realignment or re-evaluating one’s own personal health choices, since, after all, humanity was locked in a major health crisis. And most importantly, it was an opportunity to acknowledge that the planet itself is ailing from abuse and neglect with CV as a metaphor urging a personal reconnection with Nature.
In early 2020, Neil Ferguson of the UK’s Imperial College used a scare tactic to predict that 80% of Americans would be infected and that there would be 2.2 million American deaths – neither of which materialized. Yet Ferguson’s extremism accomplished its intended purpose in establishing the basis for draconian Lockdown requirements. Ferguson later retracted his earlier prediction down to 20,000 fatalities.
With current infection fatality rate at 0.20%, Lockdowns have been devoid of science and are based on arbitrary, contradictory and inconsistent requirements.
Just a few examples come to mind, such as liquor stores and big chains are considered ‘essential’ and remain open but stand-alone, independent, mom ‘n pops are not. Barbers may be open but hair salons may not. While it is advised to get tested for Covid19, a colonoscopy or other elective surgery are not allowed. While vitamins C and D and Sunshine strengthen the immune system, all outdoor sport programs have been canceled.
In an unexpected development, a recent JP Morgan study asserted that the Lockdowns failed to “alter the course of the pandemic” as it “destroyed millions of livelihoods” and that as infection rates ‘unrelated to often inconsistent lockdown’ measures decreased, fewer outbreaks were reported as the quarantines were lifted.
As the official narrative of the Covid19 as an existential threat has collapsed, it is interesting to follow how ‘hot spots’ occur just as a particular State, like Florida, announces re-opening.
Those new hot spots encourage a reinvigorated debate over mandatory face masks and social distancing with its success depending on a duplicitous media instilling panic and a naive public still believing Covid19 to be more dangerous than seasonal flu.
Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, technical lead of WHO’s COVID19 Task Force threw a monkey wrench in the works recently by stating:
It still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual.”
The next day, there was panic at the WHO but Dr. Van Kerkhove’s uncensored comments were very clear as they validated questioning the purpose of the entire Lockdown process. If an asymptomatic person is not spreading the disease but might publicly increase herd immunity, then why wear a face mask or be quarantined?
House Speaker Pelosi called for a national mask mandate as HHS Secretary Azar reported that Pence and Trump are tested daily and are asymptomatic; therefore not required to wear a mask.
To date, there is no standard for what constitutes a ‘safe’ face mask or instructions for disposal considering that a used face mask will be a contaminated bio-hazard material; ergo a face mask is more of a device to require citizen compliance than a safety precaution.
Adding a partisan narrative to the crisis, the most expansive lockdown restrictions (some with criminal penalties) came from predominantly Democratic Governors and Mayors who offered no science or forensic data to prove that either mandatory face masks or home sequestration have failed to prevent a spread of the virus.
During a House Oversight committee meeting, the mask debate broke down along party lines with Dems dutifully covered while strenuously objecting to their mask-free peers.
A riveting June 23rd Palm Beach County Commission public hearing on a proposed Mandatory Face Mask ordinance drew overwhelming opposition.
While OSHA’s (Occupational Safety and Health Agency) responsibility is to oversee the health and safety of every American worker as each workplace is expected to comply with OSHA standards, its website regarding COVID19 states that cloth-based face masks
will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.“
OSHA goes on to inform that a safe level of oxygen must be maintained as an oxygen deficient atmosphere (defined as below 19.5% by volume) creates a respiratory risk.
While there is no sound science or evidence to prove the benefits of mandatory usage, the NE Journal of Medicine reported that:
We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection […] The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”
More recently, NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci declared masks as largely ‘symbolic’ as he was setting an example for what other people should be doing.
There’s also a “Risk of Hypoxia to All Mask Wearers” according to Drs. Russell Blaylock and Zach Bush.
With not a whit of science in support, Social Distancing which is a mutually exclusive phrase since there is nothing social about enforced distancing from other humans, has been attributed to a CIA protocol in use since the 1950’s to break a prisoner’s resistance or a teenage science project.
In any case, SD has proven a great way to erode an individual’s normal need for social contact, to effectively starve the brain function of human interaction and comparable to other emotionally unhealthy deprivations. As former Vietnam POW John McCain related “It crushes your spirit more effectively than any other form of mistreatment.”
Rules 3 and 44 of the Nelson Mandela Rules warn of being cut off from the outside world and prohibits more than two weeks of isolation as cruel and inhumane treatment.
While the manufactured COVID 19 health crisis opened the door for the World Economic Forum and its friends to activate One World Government, millions of Americans continue to play the cognitive dissonance game with little awareness they are witnessing a government takeover with increased surveillance and censorship. As coordinated violent protests in Seattle and DC spread a thinly veiled political coup, all accomplished more easily while the American public were in Lockdown.
'Psychologically' Locked-Down
Rob Slane via The BlogMire,
On the first day of “lockdown”, I wrote this:
“So that seems to be that. The end of Britain as we knew it. … I must say I am astonished and saddened that this has happened to the country I love, because of an illness which will likely turn out to kill no more than might die during a very bad flu season*. Astonished and saddened by the fact that we are risking economic meltdown and the untold misery this could bring to the lives of millions in lost jobs, decimated businesses and a plunging into poverty. Astonished and saddened that a once free people are being caged like prisoners, at a huge risk to their mental health, general wellbeing and future liberties. Astonished and saddened that so many freeborn people seem to be welcoming all this.”
Months later, and after having done all I could think of to warn people and plead with them about what is happening to them and what is being done to them, both on this blog, on Twitter, and elsewhere, through analysis of data, by pointing to true experts who are ignored by the media, and by careful argumentation, the astonishment I once had for these things has morphed into something like a shrug of resignation.
Months into the most dangerous social experiment ever conducted; with no political or media opposition to be seen; with a tsunami of unemployment coming our way; with social and public life frozen due to the ongoing restrictions; with millions still petrified and panicked by a virus that has indeed turned out to be roughly as deadly as a severe flu season; with local “lockdowns” now being implemented for no rational reason whatever; and with Schedule 21 — perhaps the most sinister legislation this country has seen for centuries — being passed without a peep of controversy, and apparently millions still cannot see what is happening to them and what is being done to their lives and their country. What can one do except shrug?
When I wrote that piece in March, I intuitively sensed that something had happened from which we would not recover for years, decades, perhaps even generations. I marvelled at those who kept saying it would soon be over — three weeks to flatten the curve and all that — not because of any intuition I might have felt, but because the report which was used to put us into “lockdown” — Neil Ferguson’s “boggy mess” “angel hair pasta” report — could hardly have been plainer that this was not going to be the case:
“When examining mitigation strategies, we assume policies are in force for 3 months, other than social distancing of those over the age of 70 which is assumed to remain in place for one month longer. Suppression strategies are assumed to be in place for 5 months or longer.
“A minimum policy for effective suppression is therefore population-wide social distancing combined with home isolation of cases and school and university closure. To avoid a rebound in transmission, these policies will need to be maintained until large stocks of vaccine are available to immunise the population – which could be 18 months or more [my italics].
Be honest, those who supported the “lockdown” policy and believed it would be all over soon: did you actually read the report that put us into it to find out what was in store for us? Somehow, I doubt it.
Yet, even without looking at Ferguson’s hopelessly wrong report (click here to see just how hopelessly wrong), it was plainly obvious that it wasn’t going to be over in three weeks, and that we were moving into an era of what I would call a Medical Tyranny, or Health & Safety Despotism, take your pick. Why?
Because once a people have accepted that these actions are right and proportional to the threat of a virus with a similar mortality to a bad flu season, how exactly do you propose going back to normal? If hysteria, fear and panic are created on those kind of levels, rather than calmness, reason and proportionality, all you’ve done is set a new benchmark for all future threats, from which there is only one escape — that is, to admit that the whole thing has been a monumental blunder, and vow never to repeat it again.
One of the few people in the public eye to really grasp this was the Swedish epidemiologist, Johanne Giesecke. Where others appeared to look not much further than the end of their nose, he was looking way off into the future, not just in terms of the Swedish herd immunity strategy (which is, I think, now largely achieved), nor the economic and social consequences. No, he also foresaw with amazing prescience the conundrum we would face, whereby on the one hand we could not keep lockdown indefinitely, since it would destroy our society:
Yet on the other hand, according to Giesecke, we wouldn’t be able to lift it fully, because having acted in this way for such a virus, we’d have to continue with the same treatment for every virus of similar lethality that comes along, or even the same one if it doesn’t go away, because we had created a precedent and because public fear would demand it:“But then, what next? No democratic society can remain in lockdown for many months or years. Their economies cannot withstand it, and the public won’t allow it.”
“You’ve painted yourself into a corner. What are you gonna do for the next 30 years? I don’t know how you gonna handle that. But that’s your problem!”
Well quite. What are we going to do if Covid-19 comes back in the winter? Or Covid-20 comes along next year? Not to mention Covids-21,22,23 etc? Or maybe even a really bad influenza? Are we going to shutter our economy every time? Are we going to quarantine millions of healthy people again? The precedent has been set, the fear has been created, the Pandora’s Box has been opened. How do we shut it?
We have, by accepting the policy of quarantining millions of healthy people for whom Covid-19 posed almost no danger (fact: the number of under-60s who have died of Covid-19 with no pre-existing condition in English hospitals is 302), shutting places of worship, cafes, pubs, restaurants etc, and allowing the Government to stoke up fear, acted rather like a person with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Instead of accepting that the world is a dangerous place, life is risky, and we’re all going to die one day, we have instead allowed the apparent threat of a virus to dominate us, to shape our whole way of life, to alter our thinking and our being, to destroy the good things we had, to rid ourselves of the chance to live properly like free people. Most appallingly, in my view, is what we have done to children, who are being treated like lepers, denied the opportunity to have normal childhoods in a normal environment (fact: the number of under 19s that have died in English hospitals from Covid-19 is 16 with underlying conditions, and 4 without).
Although the worst aspects of the national physical “lockdown” may have been lifted, what I would describe as Psychological Lockdown is here to stay. We see it in the increasing pressure, and soon-to-be state-mandated wearing of face coverings, which is something I had previously associated with some of the more intolerant regimes in the Middle East.
The mandated wearing of these secular burkas is hideous, dehumanising, and extremely unnerving, and the thought of my children having to wear these things and cover their faces is most distressing. It is remarkable that people accept being told to wear these things by a Government which just three months ago went out of its way to tell us that they were unnecessary and that there was no evidence for their efficacy (which there isn’t).
I also find it incredible that people can blithely put them on now, of all times, when deaths from the virus have almost come to an end, and yet it doesn’t occur to them to ask why — if the things are oh so necessary — the Government advised against wearing them in March. Is this cognitive dissonance on steroids? Perhaps, but then again, I have recently come to realise that many do not simply believe that the Government follows the science; they believe the Government is the science, even if that involves believing utterly contradictory messages from day to day, or month to month:
As I said at the beginning, after months of trying to warn people of where this is heading, only to be smeared with insults or met with sheer apathy, I now simply shrug my shoulders in a sort of, “Oh well, have it your own way,” sort of manner. Of course, I continue to pray fervently that the future would be other than the bleak picture I have painted, and as a rampantly Post-millennial Christian, I am 100% persuaded that one day this will indeed be so. But for the foreseeable future, I’m afraid we’ve chosen a course where we decided to hand in the keys of our lives and our freedoms to the Government in return for the illusion of safety. From this there is only one escape — but that would involve something I’m not sure we’re yet ready to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment