The Bell-Ends of Doom
In a recent article (well worth a read, and I look forward to the rest in the series) Igor Chudov examines some of the overt manipulations that have been employed to shape our thoughts, feelings and behaviours over the course of the ‘pandemic’ years. These manipulations have been, overall, extremely effective, but not everyone was quite so susceptible.
These techniques are still being employed, of course, but what I find interesting is the extent to which they have also been counter-productive. Igor asked his readers about when they became suspicious of the Goo and the many comments he received make fascinating reading.
There are still those who will do the Great Swerve of Panic whenever they are approached by an un-masked individual, but there has also been a steadily increasing number of people for whom the official Narrative of Doom™ no longer makes any sense. Of course it never made any sense - scientifically, economically, ethically - but more and more people are realizing this now.
There have been so many warning bells ringing for me throughout this whole sad, sordid and pathetic affair that I have often felt like a spectator at the Annual World Gathering of the Society of Campanologists with Parkinson’s.
It is no cause to celebrate. The deep and severe erosion of trust in our public institutions will have profound consequences. They are no longer worthy of our trust and maybe they never have been, but their duplicity and malevolence has been starkly revealed over the last couple of years in a way that, unlike the ‘pandemic’, really is unprecedented.
Back in 2019, in my blissfully naïve and innocent bubble, I was a good little soldier for the interests of Pharma. I got all my vaccines, so did my kids, and I thought vaccines were a modern miracle; a great achievement of human intellect that had saved millions of lives. The idea is brilliant - get your body primed, the defences built, before the viral or bacterial invasion. Fight them off on the beaches before they’ve reached the pastures and plains. But in science there is often something of a difference between in theory and in practice.
Now, vaccines might still be a modern miracle. The difference is that I’m no longer prepared to accept that as a statement of fact. After seeing all the tricks and almost fraudulent manipulations of data that have been undertaken to prop up the Safe and Effective™ narrative for the covid Goo, and how that narrative has wildly swung from ‘if you get vaxxed you won’t get covid’ to ‘if you get vaxxed it helps to protect you from serious disease’, I’m no longer quite as sure as I once was about vaccines. Any vaccine.
The probability that our health institutions and Pharma were 100% honest, straightforward, and acted with saintly integrity and objectivity for all prior vaccine data, yet just had a bit of a blip when it came to the covid Goo is, I would suggest, indistinguishable from zero.
If vaccines really are a modern miracle then, in health terms, the whole covid Goo propaganda machine has been a disaster. I don’t know what proportion of ‘anti-vax’ people there were before the covid debacle, but I’d be willing to bet my house that this proportion is very significantly higher now.
Maybe I’m not quite an ‘anti-vaxxer’ yet, but I’m definitely in a ‘vaccine sceptic’ group now. I’m hellishly sceptical after seeing all the shenanigans surrounding the covid Goo, and once trust has been broken it’s hellishly difficult to rebuild it.
The warning bells have been many and they’re still ringing - and perhaps even more clearly now.
Bell #1
There is no doubt whatsoever that the severity of the pandemic was grossly distorted and exaggerated at the outset. To quote a certain prominent US figure, “I mean, c’mon, man” what was the scientific or medical rationale for recording a covid death as death for any reason within 28 days of a positive test?
Words like ‘unprecedented’ and ‘emergency’ and ‘crisis’ were thrown about like underwear at a Tom Jones concert. There was little real attempt to stress the huge variation in risk between the young and the elderly and, certainly in the UK, government psy-ops teams worked hard to amplify the fear.
If you weren’t afraid for yourself you were made to feel afraid for Granny. This climate of fear is essential if you want a high vaccine take-up. If people are not particularly afraid of a disease, either for themselves or others, then vaccine take-up will be lower.
One could argue that this heightened level of fear was necessary to get more compliance with the measures (you know those oh so effective measures that really worked sooooooooo very well?). But politicians are more than capable of pushing several agendas under one framework. In fact, I would suggest they are masters at this process - making some legislation look perfectly reasonable on the surface whilst hiding the real drivers behind it.
Bell #2
Concepts like vaccine passports and new ‘health security’ paradigms linked to digital ID’s were touted even before anyone knew whether a vaccine was possible (or before any such knowledge was made public). Such measures could only be seen to be ‘necessary’ to the average person if they felt they were in the midst of a truly devastating and unprecedented emergency.
Bell #3
The role of natural immunity, acquired immunity and herd immunity was consistently downplayed and sometimes even downright dismissed. This was clearly not driven by science, but by politics.
The only real plausible explanation for this is that they wished to create an environment where vaccines were seen as the only realistic option, and the only way to achieve herd immunity. Health wasn’t important, getting people vaccinated was important. How else are we to understand the drive to vaccinate those who had already been infected?
Indeed, the WHO quietly dropped natural and acquired immunity from their description of how herd immunity is achieved. I don’t think they expected the backlash this caused and so they did largely re-instate their old description, but that they changed it in the first place at all is rather indicative of their true intent.
In the UK it appeared that the government fumbled and bumbled with talk of a ‘herd immunity strategy’, but this was roundly criticized in the press and they caved in to pressure and opted for lockdown instead. It was a masterstroke. In one fell swoop the government (a) appeared to be acceding to popular demand and reluctantly implementing lockdown and (b) managed to quash any further discussion of herd immunity as it had now become a dirty word (and equated with the pejorative phrase ‘let it rip’).
Later on, of course, when vaccines were available, it was possible to talk about herd immunity again, but only in the context of the vaccines.
Bell #4
Very early on, before such a thing could possibly have been known, the notion and alleged importance of asymptomatic transmission became a significant part of the covid tapestry that was being woven. The whole concept of a healthy human being was dismantled and, almost overnight, we all became walking potential biohazards. There was no such thing as a healthy human being anymore and any one of us could be merrily strolling along, as happy as Larry, and be a super-spreader.
Early on, therefore, the seed was planted that we were all a danger to others, irrespective of our actual health status. When the vaccines arrived we were thus suitably primed to accept vaccination as a duty to others.
Before the disastrous failure of the covid Goo became more widely known how many times did you hear someone try to be reassuring with the words “It’s OK - I’ve been vaccinated”? I know I heard this pointless mantra rather a lot.
Of course, when it became clear that the covid Goo neither prevented you from infection, nor from protecting others, the story changed to “the vaccines protects you against severe illness”. But no vaccine in history has been viewed merely as a prophylactic. Their purpose has always been to prevent infection and to provide a break in transmission.
I can’t speak for everyone, but not once before any of the vaccines I’ve had in my life was I told : this will not prevent you from being infected with the disease, or passing it on, but it will lessen the severity of any symptoms.
Right or wrong, prior to the covid Goo, the common understanding was that if you’ve been vaccinated against some disease you would not get it. Now it seems lots of people are pretending that vaccines were never thought of like this and that it’s perfectly normal for a vaccine to only lower symptoms.
Bell #5
Vaccine passports have never made any sense. They are entirely superfluous for both highly effective and only weakly effective vaccines. In the case of the covid Goo they were merely a way of choosing which group of people you would be infected by - the vaxxed or unvaxxed.
Bell #6
We were all told about a so-called ‘pandemic of the unvaccinated’. Those who rejected the Goo would face a ‘Winter of Death’ with hospitals filling up with those irresponsible un-jabbed people who would take up beds meant, presumably, for more deserving people. Many people, including some doctors, advocated for a kind of moral triage system in which treatment should preferentially be given to the jabbed.
Un-jabbed people didn’t die in droves, hospitals did not overflow with the Goo-free. The pandemic of the unvaccinated did not happen.
Furthermore, the unvaccinated were blamed for the creation of new variants. Not only were they dying in greater numbers (allegedly) and taking away resources from the more deserving jabbinated, they were prolonging the pandemic. Of course, no one ever properly explained why the evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria occurs in those who take antibiotics, but the opposite occurs for the covid Goo; those who don’t take the Goo were said to be driving the formation of new, vaccine-resistant, variants. Must be that ‘science’ stuff we heard so much about.
Bell #7
The Pharma companies negotiated a very sweet deal for themselves. They signed contracts with governments, extremely lucrative contracts, that ensured they faced zero liability for their products AND included clauses which effectively required active suppression of alternative potential treatments.
They even managed to get government agencies to act as marketing arms using tax-payer money to promote the Goo on a scale hitherto unseen for any Pharma product in history. One could legitimately describe this free advertising on behalf of Pharma as unprecedented.
Perhaps I shouldn’t even mention the attempt by the FDA in the US, a tax-payer funded government agency, to act on behalf of Pharma and get awkward vaccine trial data suppressed for up to 75 years. If this single act of wanton malfeasance doesn’t convince you that there’s something very, very wrong indeed in the relationship between government and Pharma, then nothing ever will.
I probably shouldn’t even further mention that whilst having negotiated zero liability for themselves Pharma chief executives pushed for treating those who argued against the Goo, or merely raised concerns, as criminals.
I definitely shouldn’t mention the DHS in the US who want to categorize anti-vaxxers and those who distrust public institutions as ‘domestic terrorists’.
Bell #8
You’ve all seen the VAERS spike. It’s not a bump, or a wiggle, or a blip. No, it’s a fucking enormous uptick in reported deaths and adverse events.
It’s the mother of all safety signals.
Yet, almost cavalierly, it has been dismissed. VAERS, it is said, is not fit for purpose, unreliable and not to be trusted. But if this was the case, and presumably was the case before the advent of the Holy Goo, then when you’re going to attempt to inject (several times) your entire population with an experimental drug, why wasn’t a more suitable and trustworthy system designed and implemented?
Could it possibly be because having a more flawed system in place allows one to exploit those flaws to more easily give a misleading picture of vaccine safety?
It is curious just how much worse VAERS is said to be now that we have the Goo. It managed to survive for something like 3 decades without such public savaging.
Bell #9
In a truly unprecedented move most governments around the world decided to ignore ALL previous scientific advice and indulge in the performative, and ultimately useless, pantomime of lockdown and restrictions.
Together with the deliberate amplification of fear this creates a very convenient double-whammy. People not only wanted to be rescued from the fear of a virus, but also to be rescued from the imposed restrictions.
Isn’t it wonderful that, at a stroke, the Goo was available to rescue us from this double dilemma? As it turned out, the vaccines didn’t live up to that promise - but who cares as long as enough people get this crap into their arms, eh?
Having dinged every bell on our descent into the 9 circles of Hell (and there are definitely more levels than this in covid Hell) it’s probably time to stop.
I don’t claim that all of these things are deliberate and cynically implemented as a means to increase Goo uptake, but if this was indeed your goal then everything that has happened has been mightily convenient. If your goal at the outset was to lead to digital ID’s, more social surveillance and control, and digital currency, then the intermediate goal of high vaccine uptake might be an important stepping stone.
I’m not saying this is what happened, but the confluence of convenient circumstances sets another bell ringing for me.
It might just be that governments had a collective dose of Parkinson’s and those bells have been ringing at random - but I don’t think we should entirely discount the possibility our governments are much more competent and devious than we give them credit for.
Maybe it really is the case that our governments and official agencies are populated with idiots, but when I see what has been implemented in response to covid I do find myself wondering whether governments and official agencies could be quite that stupid?
I worked for a large vaccine manufacturer for years. I believed in vaccines, though always had a health dose of scepticism about their necessity (and always passed on the flu one). I did think they largely worked, and assumed that they had been tested properly.
The pandemic has opened my eyes to the slack regulatory standards applied to vaccines, that would never pass muster for other kinds of pharmaceuticals. I'll certainly think twice about getting any further vaccines or allowing my children to have any.
With respect to coronavirus
(1) the virus never necessitated vaccination for the under 65s unless obese or other health issues, from an economic perspective even - let alone any health based one
(2) ADE was my initial concern on the development of the vaccines so I hung back until I could see if it were an issue (assumed 2-3 years before being certain). Since then it has definitely become a case of "the more you know, the more you NO!!"
And yes I do think politicians are by and large that stupid. Like all other people, they are prone to fears that overrule rational thought, they defer to "experts" (who are nothing of the sort. WTF does Patrick Vallance know about either viruses or vaccines? I mean he worked at GSK but he had no responsibility for vaccines or HIV research. Most of his time was spent fannying about on his pet projects (all failed) and kissing butt), and want to look right - and so refuse to acknowledge evidence they are wrong.
The elephant in the room is getting bigger and bigger. They won't be able to ignore it much longer.
Here in Germany, measles vaccine is mandatory for children; the mandate was introduced some time before Covid. The whole Covid vaccine circus might actually make people more suspicious, driving down the measles vaccination rate despite the mandate.