Dr Piers Robinson
There is a case to be made that the most important part of any propaganda campaign is the drive to ensure that certain voices, claims and arguments either never see the light of day or otherwise remain contained within “fringe” or “alternative” circles.
Since the start of the COVID event, authorities around the world have sought to implement quite extraordinary policies including the so-called “locking down” of entire populations, compulsory masking and coercion through, for example, the mandating of multiple ‘vaccine’ injections. Many of these policies fly in the face of long-established and well-evidenced public health approaches to dealing with respiratory viruses whilst the scientific cogency of these measures – including lockdowns, community masking and “vaccine” injections – is coming under increased scrutiny.
At the same time, the catastrophic consequences, the so-called “collateral damage” (a military euphemism for wartime civilian casualties), of these extreme policies for populations around the world is becoming well-established. Randomised controlled trials of the injections to date have not shown net overall benefit, while accumulating evidence from passive reporting suggests they may be a cause of significant levels of harm. A central part of selling these extreme, and ultimately highly destructive, policies has involved the use of propaganda.
One of the problems with researching and writing about propaganda is that many people believe it to be alien to democratic states. However, as Edward Bernays, considered by many to be a key figure in the development of 20th century propaganda techniques, explained and promoted…
the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
At least to an extent, this belief in propaganda rests upon an assumption or belief that people are ultimately selfish, egotistical, power-hungry and hedonistic beings who require guidance and incentive; it therefore follows that propaganda is required by powerful actors in order to provide a degree of structure, order and purpose to a given society. In contrast, if one assumes that humans are ultimately good and well-inclined towards each other and to the natural world, and that they are capable of great things if conditions permit, propaganda emerging from self-interested and powerful actors equates to a parasite within the human mind that seeks to lead humans away from their better instincts .
To this one might add the propensity of those with power to define themselves as the arbiters of truth and morality:
The moral attitudes of dominant and privileged groups are characterised by universal self-deception and hypocrisy. The unconscious and conscious identification of their special interests with general interests and universal values […]. […] the intelligence of privileged groups is usually applied to the task of inventing specious proofs for the theory that universal values spring from, and that general interests are served by, the special privileges which they hold.
Whatever one’s position on the justifiability of propaganda, and although we usually call these techniques by different names today, employing euphemisms such as “public relations” or “strategic communication”, it is a fact that techniques of manipulation are part and parcel of contemporary liberal democracies.
Promoting the Narrative
In the case of the COVID-19 event, propaganda has been deployed across democracies on an unprecedented scale. In order to gain compliance with the unorthodox and intrusive measures adopted during the COVID-19 event many forms of “non-consensual persuasion” have been employed, ranging from manipulated messaging designed to increase “fear levels” through to coercion.
Indeed, very early on it came to light that behavioural scientists were providing advice to the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). UKColumn reported that this group, named the “Scientific Pandemic Influenza group on Behaviour (SPI-B)”, was (re)convened on 13 February 2020. One document produced by this group identified “options for increasing adherence to social distancing measures” which include persuasion, incentivization and coercion.
In the section on “persuasion” it states that the…
perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging
The document also referred to using…
media to increase sense of personal threat.
Many of these “behavioural science” approaches to manipulation used in the UK context have been documented in Laura Dodsworth’s influential work State of Fear whilst Dr Gary Sidley has written about the remarkable reluctance of anyone in authority to accept responsibility for the deliberate manipulation of the public. Dr Colin Alexander has, for some time, been tracking the propaganda output across the UK public sphere.
More widely, and as described by Iain Davis, these approaches have been paralleled at the global level. In February 2020, according to Davis, the World Health Organisation (WHO) had established the Technical Advisory Group on Behavioural Insights and Sciences for Health (TAG);
The group is chaired by Prof. Cass Sunstein and its members include behavioural change experts from the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Professor Susan Michie, from the UK, is also a TAG participant*.
Since then, Susan Michie has taken over as chair.
Creating deafening silences
One aspect of the COVID-19 event propaganda has been the aggressive promotion of official narratives; but just as important has been the suppression and censorship of those questioning authorities. Indeed, there is a case to be made that the most important part of any propaganda campaign is the drive to ensure that certain voices, claims and arguments either never see the light of day or otherwise remain contained within “fringe” or “alternative” circles.
Part of this process of suppressing arguments and opinion involves superficially well-meaning attempts to manage what has been increasingly labelled as “misinformation” and “disinformation”. Elizabeth Woodworth documents the emergence of the so-called Trusted News Initiative (TNI) prior to the 2020 COVID-19 event and which involved a coalition of mainstream/legacy media establishing a network that would serve to combat “misinformation” and “bias”. She quotes the then BBC Director-General Tony Hall:
“Last month I convened, behind closed doors, a Trusted News Summit at the BBC, which brought together global tech platforms and publishers. The goal was to arrive at a practical set of actions we can take together, right now, to tackle the rise of misinformation and bias … I’m determined that we use [the BBC’s] unique reach and trusted voice to lead the way – to create a global alliance for integrity in news. We’re ready to do even more to help promote freedom and democracy worldwide”
By 2020, according to Woodworth, the TNI had incorporated “Twitter, Microsoft, Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, Reuters, and the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism” and, predictably, adopted the role of tackling “harmful coronavirus disinformation”.
In the UK at least, there has also been military involvement with the 77th Brigade operating as part of the COVID-19 communication strategy. 77th Brigade activities include information warfare and “supporting counter-adversarial information activity” which includes…
creating and disseminating digital and wider media content in support of designated tasks.
Tobias Ellwood, who is both a Member of Parliament and Chair of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee, is, remarkably, a reservist with 77th Brigade. In an answer to a written question in parliament it was confirmed that “members of the Army’s 77th Brigade” are…
currently supporting the UK government’s Rapid Response Unit in the Cabinet Office and are working to counter dis-information about COVID-19.
The Rapid Response Unit itself was established in 2018 in order to, according to its head Fiona Bartosch, counter “misinformation” and “disinformation”, and “reclaim a fact-based public debate”.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has also followed a similar tack cautioning the public about “misinformation” and “disinformation”. In a release titled “Let’s flatten the infodemic curve”, they advise people to refer to “factcheckers” and legacy media:
When in doubt, consult trusted fact-checking organizations, such as the International Fact-Checking Network and global news outlets focused on debunking misinformation, including the Associated Press and Reuters
The WHO describes in detail its involvement with social media and “big tech”:
“WHO has been working closely with more than 50 digital companies and social media platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, TikTok, Twitch, Snapchat, Pinterest, Google, Viber, WhatsApp and YouTube, to ensure that science-based health messages from the organization or other official sources appear first when people search for information related to COVID-19. WHO has also partnered with the Government of the United Kingdom on a digital campaign to raise awareness of misinformation around COVID-19 and encourage individuals to report false or misleading content online. In addition, WHO is creating tools to amplify public health messages – including its WHO Health Alert chatbot, available on WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger and Viber – to provide the latest news and information on how individuals can protect themselves and others from COVID-19.”
An Institutionalised Culture of Censorship and Suppression of “wrong think”
These developments, along with others to be documented in due course via work at PANDA, would appear to have had major consequences in terms of suppression of debate. A preliminary examination of events over the last 2.5 years indicates this suppression has operated in at least three different ways:
- direct censorship through removal of content and deplatforming;
- sponsoring of hostile coverage designed to smear and intimidate anyone raising critical questions regarding the COVID-19 narrative;
- coercive approaches involving threats to livelihood and employment.
I shall deal with each in turn.
• Censorship and deplatforming
Formal approaches to censorship via state-backed action were seen early on in the UK context with the regulatory body OFCOM issuing guidelines to broadcasters.
Dodsworth (p.31) reports that broadcasters were instructed to be alert to:
health claims related to the virus which may be harmful; medical advice which may be harmful: accuracy or material misleadingness in programmes in relation to the virus or public policy regarding it”(Dodsworth p. 31).
One possible manifestation of this policy was the remarkable instruction issued to Oxford professor Sunetra Gupta. On October 14, 2020, she appeared on BBC News to talk about the lockdowns imposed in the north of England. It is claimed that just before she went on air, one of the producers told her not to mention the Great Barrington Declaration, a document signed by eminent scientists setting out an alternative policy that would avoid lockdowns and other unorthodox measures.
Across social media, from almost day one of the COVID-19 event, tech giants (“big tech”) were willingly signing up to a strategy of censorship.
In April 2020 it was reported that YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki had declared that it would act to remove anything going “against World Health Organization” recommendations. Notable removals from YouTube included interviews with Dr John Ioannidis of Stanford University and British physician Professor Karol Sikora whilst US Senator Rand Paul’s speech questioning the efficacy of facemasks in August 2021 was removed by YouTube. Dr Robert Malone, inventor of part of the MRnA technology used in the COVID-19 injections, and who has become a notable critic of official policies and narratives, was also removed from Twitter.
A large part of the policing of debate across social media platforms has involved issuance of warnings that a given post violates “community standards” in some way and some, such as LinkedIn, state that content at variance with authorities can lead to censoring. As Dr David Thunder has documented, the exact wording of Linkedin’s policy on “misinformation” states: “Do not share content that directly contradicts guidance from leading global health organizations and public health authorities.“
What does this actually mean, in practice? It means that some select persons, just because they got nominated to a “public health authority” or a “leading global health organization,” are protected by Linkedin from any robust criticism from the public or from other scientists.
Furthermore, censorship and suppression of academic debate has been reported with respect to academic journals whereby articles and research running against the so-called scientific consensus appear to have been unfairly removed or blocked. For example Dr Peter McCullough reports unjustified censorship of a peer reviewed and published article relating to COVID-19 whilst, more broadly, undue suppression of legitimate research findings was reported by Dr Tess Lawrie with respect to Ivermectin trials. All of these are worrying indications that academic processes themselves have become subject to nefarious censorship and control.
The censorship continues unabated and it might even be intensifying. Whilst detailed and systematic research should be conducted in order to identify the scale and range of the censorship that has been occurring, it is reasonably clear now that, relative to pre-2020, the levels are unprecedented and represent a normalization, or routinization, of censorship.
• Character Assassination through Smearing
Suppression of debate is achieved not only through formal censorship, but also through indirect tactics whereby attempts are made to destroy the reputation of those challenging power. Although perhaps not widely appreciated, the tactic of character assassination appears to have become more prevalent in recent years and it appears to be an important feature of contemporary propaganda and our ‘democratic’ landscape.
Broadly speaking, smear campaigns are designed to avoid substantive rational debate and instead denigrate the person making the argument – ‘playing the man rather than the ball’ or ‘shooting the messenger’. A feature of smear campaigns is the use of identity politics sensibilities such as concern (legitimate) over racism and the deployment of pejorative and tendentious labels. For example, those questioning COVID-19 policies have sometimes been described as far right or fascist whilst pejorative use of the term “conspiracy theorist” is frequently employed to describe those questioning official narratives.
Smear campaigns can be justifiably seen as underhand and disreputable approaches to challenging dissenting voices and they frequently pass off without observers or even the victims being fully aware that they are being targeted: those ordering or enabling the smears have good reason to avoid being uncovered whilst those executing the smears, i.e. the journalists, will defend their hit pieces as legitimate critique.
In the case of the COVID-19 event, however, at least one high level smear campaign has been identified.
At the time of the release of the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) during autumn 2020, the authors were only aware of a barrage of hostile media attention such as the above noted instruction by the BBC to Professor Sunetra Gupta to not mention the Declaration during an interview. But at least some of the hostile coverage was not simply a spontaneous reaction by journalists but had been initiated by high-level officials. When the GBD was published, leaked emails showed Anthony Fauci and National Institute of Health director Francis Collins discussing the need to swiftly shut it down. Collins wrote in an email that this…
proposal from the three fringe epidemiologists … seems to be getting a lot of attention … There needs to be a quick and devastating published takedown of its premises.
Rather than a civilised and robust scientific debate, a smear campaign followed.
Other prominent instances, unproven but which bear the hallmarks of a directed smear campaign, include repeated attacks on the popular US podcaster Joe Rogan. In the European sphere, Professor Bhakdi, an early and prominent critic of COVID-19 policies has been repeatedly accused of anti-semitism and is now being prosecuted by the German authorities for inciting hatred (*see Endnotes for alt. link -Ed.). None of the accusations made in these attacks appear to be reasonable. Rogan, for example, was chastised for promoting the use of Ivermectin with many journalists referring to it, misleadingly, as “horse dewormer”. The vast bulk of Bhakdi’s work and output concerns the COVID-19 policies and, relatively speaking, his references to any issue related to Judaism is at most vanishingly small.
A subtle and arguably more widespread form of smearing involves the routine labelling of information by social media companies as harmful; for example the independent UK-based outlet OffGuardian has its tweets subject to a blanket warning suggesting their output might be ‘unsafe’ and contain…
violent or misleading content that could lead to real-world harm.
Such labelling is, arguably, defamatory.
Suppression of inconvenient opinions works through both the realm of information – censoring a person’s voice or ad hominem attacks – but also through action in the real, “material”, world via coercion. This could be the creation of conditions that deter people from speaking their mind by offering material incentives or, alternatively, threatening to deplete someone’s material circumstances. Put simply, the threat of loss of earnings.
In the case of the COVID-19 event the role of coercion can be seen through the threats to employment experienced by those challenging the narrative.
For example, Professor Julie Ponesse was forced from her position at Western University in Canada because of her refusal to receive the COVID-19 injection following the issuing of “vaccine” mandate there whilst a similar fate was suffered by Dr Aaron Kheriarty (Professor at University of California Irvine, School of Medicine and director of the Medical Ethics Program). Other academics have cited lack of institutional support with respect to their academic freedom, such as Professor Martin Kuldorff.
The coercive nature of mandates is particularly pernicious in that their implementation in universities forces ‘dissident’ academics to either go against their beliefs and opinions and comply or otherwise leave their posts. The disciplining effect is, of course, much more widely felt across the academy: the few who lose their posts serve as a warning to everyone else to reconsider their beliefs and actions. In particular, younger academics and those completing their PhDs will come to understand that compliance with the dominant narrative is the only realistic option if they are to realise their goal of an academic career.
The tactics of censorship, smearing and coercion are synergistic and help construct an environment in which self censorship becomes ubiquitous: Deplatforming of dissident scientists sends a clear warning as to the subject matter and issues that are off limits whilst examples of smearing highlight the potential unpleasant consequences of discussing such issues.
Coercion acts as a final hardstop for anyone entertaining the possibility of risking talking about censored issues and riding out the smears that will result: loss of job and income is simply too much to bear. Overall, the role of authorities in enabling censorship and coercion results in, broadly speaking, an institutionalised culture in which suppression of opinions and debate becomes the norm.
The dangers to democracy and rational debate: online harm legislation and dis/misinformation ‘fact checkers’
Clearly this situation has deleterious consequences for rational debate and democracy. John Stuart Mill explained that silencing the expression of an opinion robs us all of the opportunity to either hear an argument that might turn out to be true, or refine or reject an opinion that is faulty. There are very good reasons for this, as Mill notes:
First: the opinion which it is attempted to suppress by authority may possibly be true. Those who desire to suppress it, of course deny its truth; but they are not infallible. … All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility.
if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.
Scientific and scholarly research demands such openness to questioning and critique and, behind concepts such as tenure, is the core grounding for the academy that scholars need to be allowed to present what might appear to be controversial and even offensive (to some) opinions.
Of course, there are well argued and established limits to freedom of expression – incitement to violence for example – but we are not talking about the usual areas of debate and controversy that lie at the limits of permissible speech. Rather, we are talking about the right of people to raise questions and concerns about policies that directly affect them, such as lockdown, masking and ‘vaccinations’, and, moreover, the right of credentialed experts to raise such questions in the public sphere. That the censorship, smearing and coercion of such people has come to be tolerated is a clear indicator of how far our democracies have slipped into an authoritarian abyss.
And things are, potentially, about to become even worse with the pushing through of so-called ‘online harm bills’ including in the UK, Europe and Canada. In the UK, the proposed bill creates a category of legal but ‘harmful’ speech: as described by the pressure group Big Brother Watch:
Under the threat of penalties, the legislation will compel online intermediaries to censor swathes of online discussion including in matters of general discourse and public policy. Harmful content is defined entirely by the Secretary of State who is also granted a host of executive powers throughout the legislation.
Liberty has explained further the potential dangers of such developments:
We are concerned that the ‘legal but harmful’ category set out in the OSB is inadequately prescribed by law and risks disproportionately infringing on individuals’ right to freedom of expression and privacy. In particular, we are concerned about the wide definition of online harm as meaning “physical or psychological harm” (clause 187). This is an extremely low threshold, and encompasses innumerable kinds of harm, the extent of which in our view far exceeds the qualifications on Article 10 provided by the ECHR and HRA.
And, as Lord Sumption points out regarding the proposed UK online harm bill:
The real vice of the bill is that its provisions are not limited to material capable of being defined and identified. It creates a new category of speech which is legal but ‘harmful’. The range of material covered is almost infinite, the only limitation being that it must be liable to cause ‘harm’ to some people. Unfortunately, that is not much of a limitation. Harm is defined in the bill in circular language of stratospheric vagueness. It means any ‘physical or psychological harm’. As if that were not general enough, ‘harm’ also extends to anything that may increase the likelihood of someone acting in a way that is harmful to themselves, either because they have encountered it on the internet or because someone has told them about it.”
It is likely that such legislative developments will operate in tandem with so-called “fact checking” entities and algorithms that work to define and then exclude what is defined as “misinformation”, “disinformation”, and now “malinformation”.
The latter two are being defined now as, respectively, false information spread in order to mislead or cause harm and accurate information which is used out of context in order to harm or mislead. These terms are so nebulous that they will enable authorities to proscribe virtually any serious debate or criticism in the public sphere.
Here we see the continuing development and entrenchment of the mis/disinformation fact checking industry noted earlier. During the COVID-19 event the United Nations itself started working with the public relations entity Purpose to “combat the growing scourge of COVID-19 misinformation” which is described as a “virus spread by people”.
[t]hrough Verified, we are leveraging the UN brand, as well as popular brands that connect audiences online and offline: from Cartoon Network in Brazil to Flipkart in India.
UNESCO, similarly, is promoting education about so-called “conspiracy theories”. Remarkably, and in apparent contradiction to rhetoric regarding inclusiveness and community-driven decisionmaking, the WHO actually asks people to report on people spreading “misinformation”: As such, an un-elected international organization is actively advocating for the suppression of free speech in democratic societies.
Entities tasked with deciding what is true and what is false, as opposed to allowing ideas and arguments to be openly debated as Mill would suggest, are already creating the link between dis/misinformation and harm. For example, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a state-sponsored think tank, attacked the disparate groups questioning the COVID-19 response with a publication titled “Between Conspiracy and Extremism: A Long COVID Threat?” The institute tweeted:
Today we launch a new series of reports on the global anti-lockdown movement, beginning with this paper examining how COVID restrictions have brought together a broad church of activists in a conspiracy-extremist movement we call a ‘hybrid threat’
On the issue of coercive measures, the recent passing of a bill in California, that will enable doctors who spread ‘false information’ to be charged with ‘unprofessional conduct’ and have their licenses revoked, is a worrying sign of just how aggressive authorities are becoming.
The trajectory here is clear to discern and it entails the move to a world where the truth is defined by factcheckers and authorities, and legislation provides the underlying coercive framework to ensure any deviance is punished. This is entirely at odds with basic principles of open debate, objective scholarship and freedom of expression and is not compatible with democracy.
The End of Democracy?
There is nothing new about censorship, smearing and coercion in western democracies. For some time now, those questioning, for example, western foreign policy have been subjectedto such tactics whilst the broader 9/11 global war on terror spawned wide ranging examples of censorship, smearing and coercion in order to shore up official narratives and the belligerent wars that have been fought under its banner.
Indeed, in the realm of foreign policy and war, the prevalence of propaganda and associated drives to marginalise dissent are well known to researchers in these fields. And, today, in 2022, we are witnessing a preeminent example of coercion as we see the Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, facing the prospect of deportation to the US and the rest of his life in prison. His crime was to reveal accurate information about the 9/11 wars, especially those in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is little reason to doubt that authorities in the West are seeking to make a powerful example of Assange; a warning to the rest of us as to the price of questioning our governments when they commit illegal wars of aggression.
What is new with the COVID-19 event is a combination of the spread of these strategies of suppression and a sharp uptick in awareness amongst increasingly large swathes of the population as to the existence of propaganda in democracies. The spread can be seen in how it is now a large number of medical scientists who have been at the receiving end of drives to suppress debate, whereas before it was often just a handful of relatively unknown dissident social scientists researching foreign policy issues.
Regarding public awareness, attempting to censor high profile researchers from the medical sciences alerts more of the public as to what is going on.
And, of course, as we rapidly see the dissident scientists now being vindicated by the facts – lockdowns don’t work, the “vaccinations” can harm etc – more people become aware of the basic truth that the official COVID-19 response has been underpinned by ferocious propaganda campaigns designed to silence any experts speaking truth to power.
It is also apparently the case that trust in mainstream, or legacy, media continues a sharp decline whilst, presumably, increasing numbers of people seek out the new independent media platforms and go to organisations such as PANDA and HART for reliable information on COVID-19 related issues and more widely. 
And yet the broader trajectory for our public spheres looks ominous.
Further legislative measures to redefine free speech, networks of sponsored factcheckers defining what is and what is not, resources poured into censoring, smearing and coercing dissident voices all parallel what some analysts argue is a wider drive to restructure Western societies.
Ending any semblance of democracy may indeed be the goal, starting with the ending of freedom of expression. There are likely to be dark days ahead and it has never been so important for there to be a robust and uncompromising defence of freedom of expression.
This article first appeared on pandata.org and Propaganda in Focus
Dr Piers Robinson was Chair/Professor in Politics, Society and Political Journalism (University of Sheffield, 2016-19), Senior Lecturer in International Politics (University of Manchester, 2010-16) and Lecturer in Political Communication (University of Liverpool, 1999-05). He is co-Director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, convenor of the Working Group on Syria, Media and Propaganda and associated researcher with the Working Group on Propaganda and the 9/11 ‘Global War on Terror.
- Thanks to Colin Alexander for comments on the justifiability of propaganda and to David Bell, Maryam Ebadi, Gary Sidley and David Thunder for other comments and feedback.↩
- Niebuhr, R., (1932), Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study in Ethics and Politics. New York: Charles Scriber’s Sons.↩
- The array of new and independent media and organisations is vast; some of those, with which the author is most familiar, include media such as OffGuardian, Multipolar, the Grayzone, Unlimited Hangout, UKColumn; and Organisations such as Brownstone Institute, Would Council for Health, Children’s Health Defence, Global Collateral.↩
- * There is a dead link relating to Prof. Bhakdi being accused of anti-semitism. Admin has provided a temporary alternative link and the author has been informed. ↩
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
Rubbish, regarding vaccines. All you have to do is ask any ICU nurse who is dying. It’s not the vaccinated. All you have to do is look at Hong Kong, where the virus was totally controlled by quarantine and careful sanitation by everyone. Unfortunately the government couldn’t stop newspapers running sensational stories that were simply lies. They took cases where old people had died of the usual causes and if they were vaccinated, claimed it was the actual cause.
In one case a man drowned swimming in the sea and the newspaper claimed it was the two weeks previous vaccine! “Another victim of the syringe!” they cried.
And then, the usual government incompetence. Because of the quarantine and the scare stories, old folk wouldn’t vaccinate. No need, the virus is kept out!(But HK being off the map, while the rest of the world finds vaccines lets them open? “I don’t care. I’m too old to travel”).
And the government did…. nothing. Just “urged” people to vaccinate. And of course Omicron slipped through the defenses . One person, permitted exemption, broke the rules and it just spread like crazy. People had no immunity unless vaccinated because the masks had destroyed their immune system. (No flu season since COVID began. Nobody is getting the usual germs. Immune systems are not primed).
And who died? Yes, that’s right. The unvaccinated. 9000 deaths, 9000 people drowning in their own lungs, every breath a torture…and because of insane policy that every positive infection must be hospitalised, not enough care.
The vaccinated survived. Only ONE person with three doses died and she had very severe cancer. What part of this don’t you get?
And how exactly did it benefit these mysterious forces to close down Hong Kong? For nearly 3 years? We STILL have restrictions. Still if you visit you have to mask….huge fine for even taking a breath. Still you can’t go out to eat for a week after arrival. Who will visit under those circumstances? Our regional rival Singapore has taken all our business. How does this benefit tycoons who constitute our government? Why would they attack their own bank balances?
And hello. These government people need safe vaccines too. These are VACCINES not killer injections. All vaccines are risky: this is serious disease you are dealing with. They have been extremely effective and mostly safe: astra zeneca should have been withdrawn, that was too many blood clots.
And as for your contention that the protocols were incorrect for respiratory disease: well, what are the protocols? Because universal masking as soon as we heard the word “coronavirus” plus constant sanitation plus closing of venues broke Hong Kong infection chains very effectively. While the UK recorded 40000 deaths, HK had 4. And only 120 infections, for years. It will work and it would have done the trick if people had vaccinated 100% but it cannot go on forever due to immune system damage. It’s the correct protocol. How else do you stop the virus spreading? Go on, tell me.
Typical psyop StierScheiße, but thanks for the additive to our compost, and all its many coming benefits, as a hoary scripture has it :
Proverbs 14:4 “Where there are no oxen, the stable is clean; but large crops come from the strength of the BULL.”
All of their techniques failed on me but worked on about 95% or more. Pathetic species us homosapiens.
Dr Robinson, mention the non-existence of a virus in this context, or get the f out. Go preach your nonsense somewhere else.
Your point is misapplied. The existence of a virus called SARSCOV2 is debatable. What is not debatable is the fact nothing links this alleged virus with any unique symptoms or disease. The biggest claim that can be made for it is it may be yet another coronavirus that causes the symptom-cluster we all call “flu”. There are, however, those who allege it’s very existence remains unproved.
If you believe in the possible existence of the alleged virus, sars-cov-2, you need to present an argument for its possible existence. What is it?
20 doctors and scientists have submitted a challenge to virology labs to show its existence using the scientific method, that is, using properly controlled experiments – which haven’t been done to prove its existence. No response so far.
Did you even bother to read what I wrote before firing off this knee-jerk challenge? The point is “covid” doesn’t exist as anything but a new name for old symptoms, therefore the reality or otherwise of SARSCOV2 is irrelevant, because nothing in the official story has ever tied it to any kind of new disease. Even if it exists it’s just another one of uncountable billions of mostly harmless viruses.
I read what you wrote Sophie but now you’re saying something slightly different. Debatable and irrelevant are not the same. The thing is though I knew it didn’t exist before I knew anything about the science because the signs of a psyop were obvious in clear contradictions of reality provided to us in the images of people laid out on the ground, falling flat on their face and the (later debunked) claim that a couple of species of snake were “reservoirs” of the virus and:
— In psyops they do what they want for real and fake the rest
— there was no way to control a virus for the narrative they had planned – Wuhan, Bergamo, cruise ships, arrival in Australia and every other country etc
So if you want to go with the argument that it’s irrelevant fair enough but according to my understanding from the very strong arguments presented by a number of scientists and doctors it’s never been proven to exist (as hasn’t any virus) and I knew there wasn’t a virus simply because of psyop MO and the inability to control it for their narrative. Psyops are so much about making us believe things with smoke’n’mirrors propaganda, not simulating reality or including reality as part of the psyop … except where it’s wanted. They don’t want a virus, they only want us to believe in one … they certainly don’t need a virus to make us believe in it and, in fact, they couldn’t have one even if they wanted one for their narrative.
I can see the validity of the irrelevant argument but my preference is always to go with the fundamental truth, there is no virus. I always like to highlight the fact that what’s happening is smoke’n’mirrors propaganda, it’s all p-s-y-o-p … apart from the murderous jab, of course, that’s very, very real unfortunately … if only the whole thing was a psyop but the jab itself is not a psyop, just the persuasion that it’s necessary and will keep us safe.
The world is certainly preparing for a nuclear global suicide.
We have to avoid the mass suicide that is oncoming and we have to change the whole structure of the world so that a third world war itself becomes impossible.
If we can make the people of the world… not the politicians, leave them aside, they have the power but without the consent of the people of the world, their power is not of much use.
They can create war only if unconsciously we are ready to commit suicide, if in some way we are supportive to them.
It is our support that has given them power.
If we withdraw our support, their power disappears.
They don’t have any power of their own.
Stop listening when politicians talk, tune out of all legacy news media, they only want to convert you to their sick opinions, to spread their obscene war narratives.
When they talk they want to indoctrinate you, because everybody who has a doctrine is deep down afraid about whether it is true or not.
Politicians are talking to others so that they can believe in what they are talking.
The only way that they can feel that it is true is if they can indoctrinate as many people as possible and can see in their eyes conviction, conversion.
Why until now, is the Western intelligentsia not really fighting back against nuclear weapons?
The problem is that the Western intelligentsia is fed up with life, so there is no real resistance from the intelligentsia against nuclear weapons, against a third world war.
In fact, it seems deep down the Western mind is somehow hoping that it happens soon, because life is meaningless.
Once we can understand the problem clearly that miserable people are dangerous, for the simple reason that they don’t care whether the earth survives or not.
They are so miserable that deep down they may feel that it is better if everything is finished.
Who cares, if you are living in misery?
Only happy people, ecstatic people, dancing people would like this planet to survive forever.
People who are happy, contented, are not the people to be forced to kill other people who have not done any harm to them.
The West is suffering a severe sickness of the soul.
If all of the armies simply say, “No, we are not going to use nuclear weapons.”
If all of the scientists simply say, “No, we are not going to produce any more nuclear weapons.”
If the whole intelligentsia of the world unanimously creates a great uproar!
We need in the world more love to balance war.
We need in the world more creativity to balance the destructive forces.
We need in the world more enlightened people to balance the blind politicians.
If the globalist warmongers have nuclear weapons, then we have to create something equivalent, or more powerful, and enlightenment is certainly more powerful than any nuclear weapon.
There is time enough to withdraw our support; there is time enough to create a non-political humanity.
And the times are such that it is possible.
In ordinary times you cannot convince people to withdraw their cooperation from the politicians, but the times are abnormal and every day the war keeps coming closer.
In this moment, people can choose very easily not to cooperate, because cooperation simply means committing suicide.
We won”t have such an opportunity again.
In the past there was never such an opportunity.
It is not to be missed.
A great adventurous moment is coming close to us, there is nothing to be feared.
Humanity has lived only under the illusion of freedom.
But there is no such thing as freedom as far as the history of man up to now is concerned.
Slaveries have changed, new forms of slavery have taken their place, but freedom has not happened.
Freedom is still a dream.
As long as there is US/NATO political dependence all over the world.
There is no democracy, and there is no freedom.
It is just complete enslavement of the sleeping global masses.
Whenever some illusion is sold as beautiful you want it to be true, you want to believe in it, but whether you believe in it or not, an illusion is an illusion, it makes no difference.
Billions of dollars are being poured into Ukraine with one aim, to destroy Russia, and which Ukraine can never repay, and America never wants them to be able to repay it, so that they remain burdened, under economic pressure.
And America has promised them billions of dollars more in the coming years.
Their whole economy is now in the hands of America.
With those dollars you cannot buy peace, you cannot buy love, you cannot buy silence, you cannot buy compassion, you cannot buy anything valuable.
In fact, accepting those dollars Ukrainians have sold their souls.
If people are really silent, peaceful and loving, they will throw out all of these globalist politicians, who are nothing but warmongers, psychopaths and murderers.
That is the only hope for which people of awakened consciousness go on working.
Freedom is the greatest value and the greatest achievement in life.
Everyone should be free from all kinds of fetters – political, economic, psychological, spiritual.
Unless we can create a world which is really free, we are living only in an illusion of freedom.
Nicely put! Good to see you back in print as well.
It need not be nuclear annihilation, and that seems far from a sublime remedy to what ails Humanity if it be, as you may agree, the divergence of our attention from the Spirit, whose expression is freedom and joy, and which is by and large little known to us collectively though well known to relatively few. It is a quorum of the Knowers of Truth ( Gnostics ) which must form, and appears to indeed be forming at this epic time.
It has been through our freedom and glory that we have diverged from the purpose of mortal life, and by the same Divine grants we will come to know the Truth and assume the higher role such empowerment requires.
The charge of anti-Semitism against Bhakdi was overruled:
Which leaves the amorphous bit about how he “expressed Shoah and NS relativizing” (??!!)
See? Complaining that COVID-19 initiates a “second Holocaust” is an insult to That Momentous Event that we are not allowed to forget just as long as we don’t ask any questions about it. Though frankly this never-to-be-forgotten is irrelevant to the polystyrene plague.
haha. i wouldn’t like to be in klaus swabs shoes right about now. rofl lol 😝
The equating of criticism of the Zionist Israeli state with anti-Semitism is, by now, a tried and true strategy employed by various imperialist states, most vociferously the US, as it tries to intimidate such criticism. In the case of a Jew they often try to smear one as a “self-hating Jew”.
Of course it is thoroughly bogus. criticism of the Vatican does not equate to berating of Catholics, etc.
“The civilized have created the wretched, quite coldly and deliberately, and do not intend to change the status quo; are responsible for their slaughter and enslavement; rain down bombs on defenseless children whenever and wherever they decide that their ‘vital interests’ are menaced, and think nothing of torturing a man to death; these people are not to be taken seriously when they speak of the ‘sanctity’ of human life, or the conscience of civilized world.”
– James Baldwin – (August 2, 1924 – December 1, 1987)
One of the greatest and possibly the most important trick these pieces of filth masquerading as authority ever pulled is convincing the world they are respectable, honourable, people. They are not. The people who really pull the strings are a bunch of child raping, war criminal, genocidal, psychopathic, terrorist, occultist, criminal, devil worshipping pieces of dirt. Yeah yeah, weve heard all this before. And maybe you have. But you probably havent heard it from the horses mouth. You probably dont have much prima facie evidence of this.
Luckily, we have one of the most important historical artefacts EVER to rely on to be able to prove to people and explain to people that this is the case. Our governments are controlled and led by organised crime and EXISTENTIALIST COMMUNISTS – the most famous example being Henry Kissinger. Kay reveals A LOT about Henry Kissinger in this interview. A more vile man has never walked the Earth. And in the UK we have scumbag senior politicians like Jeremy Hunt getting on their knees for this lump of slime. Existentialists such as Henry and her husband – George Griggs – Head of NATOs Special Operations – as Kay explains, are people who will do ANYTHING to achieve their objectives. She explains that the upper echelons of the US military and presumably others are staffed by intentionally recruited homosexual men who are targeted in school and college for recruitment and nurturing ie brainwashing. This all ties in with the gay mafia and Pink Swastika and more recently, imo, the whole LGBT agenda which is pure Communism.
All of this and much much more has been meticulously verbalised and explained by the wife of former NATO Head of Special Operations and it is a must watch and share. It clocks in at over 7 hours but its worth the watch for sure. Absolute gold. People need to know that this is the reality.
Kay Griggs Reveals Evil Underbelly of Military and Government – MUST SEE!!! FULL Interview 1998
The full seven hours
Taboos in propaganda,
– Disasters of neo-liberalism:
:- myths, aims, revisions, methods, failures
:- rigged competition, welfare for the richest, corruption, plunder
:- privilege, waste, inefficiency, incompetence, blunder, stone-walling, delusion, hypocrisy, brutality
:- specific industrial danger, recklessness, disaster
:- diminishing opportunity, livelihood, representation, openness, services
:- growing travails, fears, desperation of the majority.
– Other information deemed “sensitive”, “insensitive”, immoral, hateful, inflamatory, seditious, etc.:
:- trenchant or united dissent
:- philosophy, art, traditions, policies of independent nations
:- censored history, resort to banned armaments, genocide.
– Favourable mention of a dissident source
– Above all, the identities and influence of the supreme trans-national puppeteers.
There are dozens of articles like this if you start looking:
Strength through joy!
Joy just happens to be another 33 encode. The three letters are 167 and 6+7=13 so it becomes 113 and 11×3=33. One doesn’t add the 11 because it’s a master number.
BTW I was watching HBO’s FAHRENHEIT 451 remake. The implication is that it’s some sort of Trumpist-Fundamentalist regime burning books although they never actually state it. Every book they show burnt is one of the controllers’ precious texts, whether it’s CATCHER IN THE RYE with its mind control associations, LOLITA with its paedophilia or OEDIPUS THE KING with its incest. It’s the soft left’s cult of eternal victimhood while never looking at themselves. The lead character lives alone in an apartment with the walls as TV screens and an Alexa-style bot as his company. HBO love the twice-convicted child murderer Damien Echolls so much they made three films about how innocent he was (their name equals 88, another Freemasonic master number).
I drew attention to this before:
“Drag performer George Ward, known by his stage name Cherry Valentine, has died at the age of 28, his family have announced.”
And I just realised that not only do they NOT give a reason for the death. But they don’t even say that anyone is looking into it. This is the way it is now. People “just die”, their lives are celebrated AND THAT’S THAT!
Oh, there’s no longer any need to either identify a public figure’s cause of (sudden) death– they have a right to privacy, too, y’know– or, for the same reason, to either investigate or even call for an investigation of such inexplicable sudden demises. That’s so rude!
The death was in no way connected to the deceased’s having received one or more “COVID vaccination” jabs. That’s so obvious that it’s understood and unnecessary to state, although the victims’ survivors and alleged medical caregivers are sometimes pressed by bumptious, cynical skeptics to vehemently assert the absence of a causal relationship.
They died. It wasn’t from the COVID jabs, see? That’s all the public needs to know.
The terrorists do not have any authority. They do not make any “official responses”. Freedom of expression is ofcourse important but it is inciting violence to claim poisoning is “vaccination” or these acts of terrorism are “public health responses” to “COVID-19”.
Out of interest can someone point to a (example) Reuters fact checking article that has been categorically proven to be wrong? If so, please share. If not, then I suggest it weakens a lot of above article?
As the very title of the article makes clear, it is not what the “fact checkers” say but what they ignore altogether that is telling.
Not when it comes to Fact-checkers, no, I disagree.
You want them to say (for example) vaccines are perfectly safe, then in the next sentence say their not?
The only way to study media these days is by recording and plotting distances between facts of omission. What should be there, that isn’t. It illuminates the darkened landscape like lightning.
Any other method is without foundation, since we just don’t know if what’s reported is accurate.
But what ISN’T reported stands out like a sore thumb, and by taking steps to plot the shapes made by the omissions, that ironically reveals the real storyline.
OK. So how come not 1 study that shows (for example) vaccines easily saved multiples more times more lives than lost aren’t mentioned in this articles then?
Your responses are collapsing on the unintelligible.
No, I don’t want them to say the vax is “perfectly safe”. Nor do I care if they say the opposite. I am saying that the “fact checking” site in its very title is a piece of colossal arrogance that is degrading for anyone to even look at. We are adults now and we find things out for ourselves. I have looked at these sites and their pontificating gish-galloping “rules about their method” which present the usual pseudo-logic about a spurious “objectivity”.
And how do you prove a counterfactual like that? You could easily say that, were it not for the vaccine, the entire population of the world would be dead by now. If I were born ten years earlier I would be emperor of Romania etc.
Fundamental fact: Every figure about covid is worthless. These figures are generated by a test that doesn’t even have to be corroborated by actual experience of being ill! So if you hear that there has been a mighty surging ejaculating tsunami of cases, ask yourself “And how many of these people are actually sick?” A covid death is anyone who dies within 28 days (or is it more?) of a positive test i.e. one of the aforementioned voodoo efforts.
And I’ve noticed that on more prominent public social media e.g. Facebook, anyone who questions this crap is immediately plastered with a big sign saying effectively “Oh no! Don’t believe this! Look! Here is a fact checking site to change your nappy!”
Good Evening George,
“ We are adults now and we find things out for ourselves.”.
Look at some of the comments on this article/website alone and you’ll soon conclude that actually people do need things like reliable/accurate fact checking websites. Everyone isn’t as ‘intelligent’ as you.
There’s 1 guy below claims Bill gates wealth has x20 in 3 years!
One guy the other day on another article wanted “dogs to shit on the grave of the Queen”
Lot’s of examples of subterfuge too. E.g. The admin quoting excess deaths, but comparing to 2008 to fool readers when actually 2020 was 75000 higher amount of deaths compared to the 5yr average!
So, yes we do want fact checking websites.
Everything else about Covid you mention I’ve purposely ignored as it was a digression from the point I made.
But, but… how could responsible, decent people possibly maintain rational intellectual integrity if professional fact-finders weren’t riding to the rescue to counter lunatic-fringe conspiracy theorists and their delusional and destructive fantasies?
Here’s an example from that bastion of fact-finding authority, USA Today, culled yesterday from the unimpeachable Yahoo site:
I have rarely if ever encountered a counterargument to my kinds of comments like the one above that isn’t based in “false equivalencies” which are the fornicative “godfathers” of all strawmen orphans everywhere, world without end (in sight, anyway) amen. That’s the point here, not industry-funded “stalkng horses”.
Find out about it.
Your circumlocution doesn’t fool me Mr. Ervin. My original point still stands.
There is a hell of a lot of adherence Brandolini’s law around here and you know it.
“Fact check: The virus that causes COVID-19 exists, can be tested for and is not the flu”
Thank you El Zafio.
I believe el Zafio is drawing your attention to a Reuters fact check that can be proved to be wrong, in line with your earlier request.
I disagree. As there is no reference as to what he believes and demonstrates is wrong.
Well you can resort to petulant ‘you don’t know what he’s thinking’ reasoning if you like, but it does come across like putting your fingers in your ears and going ‘la la la’ at this point since you’ve been given some very cogent answers to your initial comment which you aren’t really responding to very rationally.
We all need to work really hard at understanding what tactics are being used against us, what circular reasoning is, what appealing to authority/consensus is, what empirical evidence is and its importance and WHY we should be very sceptical of global tech corporations policing what we are allowed to say relating to our bodies and our health.
I asked a perfectly reasonable question. Anyone would think the question is being avoided!
Credul-0-meters in some smogged Italian towns just reported a seismic reading caused by busted equipment that actually exceeded the number of global “covid” “cases”. They harnessed unused PCR test kits to get these totally fact-based readings.
Pretty serious news.
Wow, he cited that omniscient multinational authority, Reuters.
We feel totally safe now.
Wow, you bust the credul-O-meter with shocking force and regularity!
It is not too late to sign the petition for a grand jury in our investigation of the CDC’s phoney covid numbers. It’ll take you only a mo’
Hello Penelope: The down vote was undoubtably from some prick without a functional brain. I signed the petition upon first release. The CDC needs to be exorcised from the planet… Thanks…
Not when it comes to Fact-checkers, no, I disagree.
You want them to say (for example) vaccines are perfectly safe, then in the next sentence say their not?
Thanks Paul, grand jury is a serious matter. It’s backed by two senators who refuse to quit. It seems so odd to me that people put so much effort into cartoons, but not into fighting back. I’m spending more time now on more serious sites.
Had an unpleasant experience yesterday. Went to L.A. to a specialty lab– a whole waiting room full of masked people & every one of them wearing those manufactured, especially-dangerous ones.
I was the only white face in the room and the only unmasked one. I hadn’t known how far I’d have to walk so I was using a wheeled walker, and probably on account of that everyone was especially courteous & considerate of me, so I couldn’t just be quiet & not try to help them.
I picked out a Hispanic face and explained to her in Spanish about the nano-plastic particles that they are finding in people’s lungs when they operate on them.
I explained how the masks weren’t helpful against viruses, but if she felt she HAD to wear one to please please wear a handmade cloth one. Then I had to pick a masked black face and explain it all again in English, loud enough for the whole room to hear.
But, oh, Paul I had all I could do to keep from crying. Those people have been wearing the goddamn pressed plastic masks for so LONG– the kids too.
It’s hard to witness. We have to fight harder.
Hello Penelope: You are correct. Grand juries need to be convened in every State jurisdiction. The majority of people don’t know a Grand Jury from a Grand Torino (car)… They wonder why their freedoms are being taken – yet do nothing to study the legal mechanisms that make it possible, erm, affordable…
Wearing an M95 mask against a nano-sized virus molecule, has about the same efficacy as wearing a bug screen or kitchen sieve over the mouth. When people are so lazy, they can’t be bothered to look up the math which details micro versus nano, they deserve the results…
It IS hard to witness, but there it is… Good luck to you…
Event 201 was held on October 18 of 2019. It was the last simulated exercise run by the globalists like: the World Economic Forum, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johns Hopkins University and assorted miscreants before the COVID scam was unleashed upon the world in 2020. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/exercises/event201/recommendations.html
When we examine their recommendations especially number seven we see their plan to suppress and censor all dissent and all offerings of alternative narratives, public policies and treatment modalities etc.
This is a global coup d’état that encompasses: the financial system, global governance, social re-engineering and the very future of humanity and the planet. They no longer do things in secret they telegraph and broadcast their intentions for all the world to see.
Only a “conspiracy theorist” would notice the amazing coincidence that after all their efforts Bill Gates has seen a 20 fold increase on his “investments” of $10 billion.
Looks like I have used both the “explanations” of the conspirators in a sentence.
Eh? In 2018 Bill Gates was worth ~$90bn. In 2022 it was reported to be $118bn.
Have you a source to share that differs from above and states “20 fold increase” please?
How did the human world become a place where every newborn that enters that world is met with suspicion and distrust…A world in which, from its first breath, the newborn is tested, suspected, and spied on 24/7 x 365 days of its every year…A world in which even Mother Nature is dis-trusted…
“Anthropology, abstractly conceived as the study of man, is actually the study of men in crisis by men in crisis.” Stanley Diamond. In Search of the Primitive. A Critique of Civilization. (1974)
All those propaganda and censorship techniques were established in October 2019, at the Event 201 exercise about a „fictional” coronavirus pandemic. Event 201 was presented at John Hopkins University in USA by a group of institutions including World Economic Forum and Bill and Melinda Gates Fundation. A list o recomandations was issued after the exercise. See Recomandation number 7:
„Governments and the private sector should assign a greater priority to developing methods to combat mis- and disinformation prior to the next pandemic response. Governments will need to partner with traditional and social media companies to research and develop nimble approaches to countering misinformation. This will require developing the ability to flood media with fast, accurate, and consistent information. Public health authorities should work with private employers and trusted community leaders such as faith leaders, to promulgate factual information to employees and citizens. Trusted, influential private-sector employers should create the capacity to readily and reliably augment public messaging, manage rumors and misinformation, and amplify credible information to support emergency public communications. National public health agencies should work in close collaboration with WHO to create the capability to rapidly develop and release consistent health messages. For their part, media companies should commit to ensuring that authoritative messages are prioritized and that false messages are suppressed including though the use of technology”.
All these decades, no one including “our democratic reps” raised the issue of all these committees, other covert advisors behind them, black budgets, “public-private partnerships”, etc. So, it is a little late.
And even with all that careful planning and censorship, millions of us figured out the plot line and solved the murder. Let’s have a round of applause for the studio audience!
It goes without saying that if the Narrative weren’t false, its proponents and disseminators would have no need to censor, smear or coerce anyone.
The only question is: why is that immensely obvious fact so hard for so many people to see?
Lets just embrace the Freedom that the Secular Ruling Families & Billionaires and jesters are providing us all!
I kinda see it as this:
This scintillating essay by Dutch author Elze van Hamelen , in today’s digest from Global Research, expands the. current and nasty NATO panorama of how “propaganda emerging from self-interested… actors equates to a parasite within the mind” as voiced above:
NATO-driven “think tanks” exposed: “CITIZEN’S BRAIN IS THE BATTLEFIELD OF THE 21ST CENTURY”:
Quite brilliant treatment of (most) all that is “new” in this crisis, echoes of the warnings within the link posted here last year, to the 2010 epic “PSYWAR: The Real Battlefield is the Mind”
With the caveat: just to view it free at Youtube is to trespass their battlefield.
But then it’s all DMZ, now.
A couple of double boosters and ALL WILL BE FINE…
The same old tripe. “Could”, “may”, “possibility of”. To top it off more speculation from Imperial College London.
“Vaccine fatigue”? No, I think people are getting wise to these publicity seekers.
Am I being censored here for “not being polite enough” to another elitist that insists that commoners are ignorant boobs that WANT elitists like them to decide Humanity’s future through a lens of their personal greed to obtain unlimited wealth? I am shadow-banned on faceboot and now here? Totalitarianism, a vanguard-to-decide, those who think themselves authorized to censor… is THE DISEASE WHICH WE MUST CURE.
I don’t think you’re being censored. You left an ‘S’ off your email address, that might have sent it into pending. If you don’t want any more issues, try checking your email is input correctly and if you do get diverted to pending just be little patient, your comment will appear soon enough. A2
On a previous post over a week ago I had some arguments with elitists who insist that an egalitarian Humanity is impossible. Then a subsequent comment disappeared upon the appearance of a “politeness” warning at post. Maybe I’m wrong.
Paper notes won’t be accepted by business/shops after 30 9 2022, but you can still exchange them with the bank of england after that date.
Thank God I bought Amazon shares with the cash from that bank robbery.
Don’s here …
Boris Johnson thanks Vladimir Putin for his “inspirational leadership”, before correcting himself to thank Zelenskyy.
meta-freudian slip, “before correcting himself”. DIY, the Queen has flown the coop.
Thank you Dr. Piers.
So sad that we are shat on from every angle.
Yet the presstitutes continue their chunter.
Do they think they’re immune from all this??
The amount of time and effort they put into their attempts is actually quite encouraging if you think about it.
Yes. The ante is upped hourly, a battle royale with humankind the king, of the King.
Thanks, a great article that breaks down the propaganda and censorship especially prevalent throughout the last few years.
I’ve found that when discussing these issues with believers of the official narratives, there is a common stance and response that is sent back my way. It goes something like,
“Well, when there’s something as serious as a pandemic and millions are dying, I can put up with the government, health authorities and media working together to ensure people do the right things and help save lives, even if that means everything they say isn’t accurate”.
So it becomes a dead-end conversation as there’s a need to address the actual science around the virus, the vaccines and lockdowns before addressing those things in the context of why the propaganda and suppression has been so strong and sustained. The former are much more difficult conversations to have and I tend now instead to simply leave it be.
Millions of people weren’t dying. 2020 was not an unusual year for mortality anywhere in the world.
There were however lots of death counters on the front of every media outlet displaying meaningless raw mortality numbers which created the opposite impression, with a cartoonish lack of subtlety that we all got used to far too quickly! A2
Even so, the believers of the narrative would think that what you say is ridiculous and they really do appear to outnumber the unbelievers.
Have you tried convincing one of the faithful?! I’ve had easier times knitting fog.
I have made firm believers pause, but rarely reached anybody unless they were willing to begin with.
However, if you make simple, truthful statements, like above, pointing out that 2008 was a worse year for UK excess mortality (and all years proceeding 2008) than 2020, even without shutdown healthcare or shut-in frail/elderly, and follow that by pointing out how inaccurate and irresponsible from a public health pov the death counters were, making no effort to adjust figures for age/population, simply presenting a statistically meaningless rolling figure over the course of 2.5 years, then they will usually elect to stop the conversation and move on to something else.
I tend to present these points in terms of questions I’d like answered, troubling details that I want to make peace with. I don’t try and present answers, just present myself as a conscientious member of society.
This usually has the effect of not ending the friendship, but shutting down conversation on such topics in future. They would rather jump off a cliff in most cases than engage again because, subconsciously, they know the facts don’t make sense.
This is a powerful weapon because it limits discourse. The Covidian cult needs this discourse to flourish. Without it, without the open sharing of mutually-agreed untruths, it suffocates.
And, as I say, most people already know the truth. They talk about it to try and drown that subliminal knowledge out. So it is a mistake to talk in terms of ‘convincing’ anyone, in my opinion. A2
Yes, I agree and have certainly experienced the difficulties in trying to lead people to questions and answers they would prefer to avoid.
I spent a lot of time at points in the last few years, because I’m sad, trawling through deliberately disconnected reports and data on the vaccines, infections, deaths and more. If you could point me to a single place where it spells out clearly that mortality has been unchanged versus other years, even with lockdowns taken into account and the corresponding reduced mortality, from a source that would be acceptable to an unbeliever, then it would be appreciated. Otherwise, you really couldn’t move the unconvinced to believe something based on what we say alone, or to swim through the dirty river of official statistics to find out for themselves.
If you could give me that source, our unbeliever would probably point you to this from OurWorldInData.org:
Excess mortality data is unfortunately not available for many countries, and because the required data from previous years is lacking this will continue to be the case. When the goal is to monitor a global pandemic, this is a major limitation of this metric.
Excess mortality can only be calculated on the basis of accurate, high-frequency data on mortality from previous years. But few countries have statistical agencies with the capacity and infrastructure to report the number of people that died in a given month, week or even day-to-day. For most low- and middle-income countries, such data is not available for previous years.
As we saw from the available excess mortality estimates discussed previously, this data is most often only available for richer countries that can afford high-quality data reporting systems.
Researchers can draw on some other sources to estimate excess mortality — such as funeral or burial records — or on data from subnational regions of poorer countries (often the capital). But in many cases no information at all can be obtained.
Where would that leave us?
This is why it may now be best to let them be! If there’s to be an awakening it will come, else it won’t.
The UK ONS’ own data shows that 2008 was deadlier than 2020. If you’re not acquainted with our piece “30 facts you NEED to know: Your Covid Cribsheet” by Kit Knightly which covers this and much more, here is a link
Here is a direct link to UK age-standardised mortality in a report from BMJ.
As you can see, when placed in context, official figures show that 2020 ranks 9th in the last 20 years. An average year (when the NHS was in a less healthy condition than 2008 no less).
Similar US stats are available in the offg piece above.
Although I would contest that there is no useful data from the rest of the world (see SWPRS.org linked in the piece above), if that really were the case it wouldn’t demonstrate anything either way, would it?! Lol We have to be careful about getting trapped into circular pandemic logic.
I would tell your friend to focus on the data we actually have, which demonstrates clearly that nothing dramatic took place to remotely justify cracking down on civil rights to unprecedented degrees, institutionally murdering elderly, frail people in their droves or forcing untrialed pharmaceutical products on people of all ages, despite all the fear-messaging telling us otherwise.
Also, please try not to inadvertently concern-troll. Thanks, A2
Thanks for the discussion and links – I’d read Kit’s piece.
I’m all aboard and have been for a good while, but I’m fairly certain despite your best efforts that the vast majority will remain within the safe walls of their church.
I have no idea what concern trolling is, I thought we were mulling over the difficulties in getting through to the unbelievers…
I don”t quote any statistics when talking with the cult members. I nicely ask “are you quite sure?”, and “where do you get your information”, and leave it at that.
It just may cause some people to re-think at a later date, but don’t bet on it.
Trying to convince a person in a trance is a waste of time and energy. They are not yet ready to wake up. Let them sleep on.
I’ve lately been doing this, too. I read recently that there are three types of people: Victims, Saviours and Sovereigns. I have this terrible tendency to want to save people with hard facts, even when they do. not want to be saved. I’ve lately been practising at being a Sovereign – living and letting people live, I mean, letting them slide into the abyss and quite possibly die soon. It’s very difficult.
check out recent last American vagabond discussion…there they look at the excess death in US, which were real and sadly appear to have more to do with poverty, poor health and medical misadventure than any maybe virus.,,.again it may be difficult to deal with attempting to tell the story….it all does have a life of its own…
here in the back waters of qld aust apparently covid is still on the loose and this week we have our local hospital area back playing games…seems some flu is doing the rounds and a few are testing positive with the pcr test….people are so gullible they don’t question that one family members tests positive while rest of family with same sickness tests negative…human minds and belief systems are complex things.
That’s where I got the link. 🙂
That’s an excellent perspective on what can be done – and what can’t.
Thank you 😀
You cannot access the minds of believers with actual facts and figures.
Even torture, on its “best” day, might not work. Exorcism the only meaningful way out.
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
― Theodore Dalrymple
What ideological hogwash. As I have said before the answer to Liberal bourgeois propaganda is not Conservative bourgeois propaganda. There is nothing “communist” about the ideological warfare of the CIA, ’cause that is what Political Correctness, Identity Politics as well as the much more recent Trans ideology is.
In the battle between political ideologies all sides call all other sides ideas “propaganda”…
“communist propaganda” ? Is there such a thing ? Is there good propaganda, and bad propaganda ?
Because the gang ruling over society – and their rival gangs – claim their rule and their ideological rationale is ‘communist’, does that really mean the ruled-over society is communist ?
And what does The Tower of Babel story tell us ?
As Mark Crispin Miller says, conservatives think that everything on MSNBC is propaganda and liberals think that everything on Fox News is propaganda – they are both right! While not all propaganda is false, it is always one-sided.
I say that the most corrupt party is the one that’s in power. Does that make them “communists”?
Jacques Camatte preferred “gangs” and “racketeers” to calling them political parties…The government, even the cops, function as protection rackets…So too the Catholic church…
Don’t know about JC, but sure; The FBI/CIA didn’t destroy the Mob, they hired them!
They ARE the Mob.
Well, other than my “Cover”.
Unbeknownst to them. What else?
FWIW, some time ago I began referring to the US government, and especially the political partisan duopoly, as a literal “organized crime syndicate”.
Needless to say, stodgy moderate types either assumed I was joking, or had lapsed into delusional “hyperbole”.
Exactly so, but the RC Church is constantly the target of Freemasons, for centuries:
-The Kennedy assassinations, both who had been carefully setting up peace negotiations thru the Vatican, with USSR and allies.
-The Vatican Banking Scandal, which was precipitated by the Italian-based “P2” (“pseudo-masonic” lodge, I love that one) headed by Roberto Calvi CFO and Licio Gelli, both 33°, that nearly collapsed Banco Ambrosiano and “Vatican Bank”. Unfun Fact: Calvi was hanged from Blackfriars Bridge, as a suiciding, but 63 days after my father was suicided, 4.16.82, nearly halfway around the world near UCLA. I finally had the guts to buy and read the book “Master of the Mysteries” which details the elevation of JWE (père) client and subject of the book, MPH, to 33° status… on NOVEMBER 22, 1953. Sure enough, this bio by Louis Sahagun of LAT gives details of dear old dad’s demise as “suicide” with “a small calibre” gun (Sirhan, who was hosted at PRS. by said MPH in 1967, six months approx. before the RFK shooting, was firing,. blanks it may be, from an Ivers-Johnson .22, an exact replica of the small firearm that killed President McKinley in the late 19th Century?) MPH was murdered 8 years later, both of which cases remain cold, “iconic” Hollywood murder mysteries, film treatment-ready!
[I don’t air this (dried) bloody family laundry for online therapy, or even weaponized therapy, LOL, but in the sincere hope that other researchers who pass by, or even abide here, will spot the flagrant oddities in these murder cases, and their historical significance (to say the least) that my namesake and father by the flesh laid upon us as a bizarre and very weighty legacy. So there you go, a nearly bottomless well of revealing facts about our NWO current crises globally.]
Fun Fact: Raymond Chandler, who was employed by the investment angels of MPH, the oil-wealthy Lloyds, knew him well and made him the real, if thinly veiled villain, of two of the original, earliest Hollywood films noir: the 1946 Bogart&Bacall blockbuster, “The Big Sleep” as the “rare book”store owner Geiger, and even more obviously in 1944 “Murder, My Sweet” as Amthor (Otto Kruger).
Imagine that the real villain, MPH, programmer of assassins it appears, was in real fact actually murdered almost a half century later, 1990!
Film-ready, but suppressed: too dark to film, even in Hollywood. I will use my baptismal day tomorrow, in London of 1976 no less, to purge these Halloween very-Samhain related spooks and shadows. What else? ]
[– the RC Pedophile Scandals, though no doubt with plenty enough culpable usual suspects, has also been nearly exclusively reported in the breaking story” phases by all Mockingbird “Usual Suspects” in MSM: Sulzberger’s NYT, WaPo, NPR and some allies. So, there’s that. The Freemasons also started and stopped the Cristero War in Mexico, with 100,000 dead just from 1926-1929. That is really strong supportive evidence for my premise: that global NWO “High Cabal” Freemasonry is behind all these things, in a SMAUG-esque quest for control of Vatican finances, and its nexus, as was also true of Hitler v. Jews. ALL about the money, not religious, other than the most debased sense of Bad Religion.
Speaking of Tolkien, my father’s client appears to have been cast in this reality-tv epic drama as either a Nazgul/Ringwraith, or the 20th century incarnation of Sauron.
Have a blessed All Saints’ & All Souls’ Day.
One of the master keys to mind control is ownership of definitions.
This is the quote I repeat ad nauseam but I just take out the word “communist”. In fact, it headlines the article I just posted on substack (link below).
This is the most important thing said about propaganda ever! It is so apt and so fundamental. The limitless Emperor’s New Clothes effect is 100% relied on by those in power when perpetrating their psyops – it actually works better to over-egg the omelette with gratuitous ridiculousness than trying to make the story as credible as possible. You’re aware of the phenomenon of “revelation of the method / hidden in plain sight”, right, that the perps use to justify what they do because they TELL us underneath the propaganda? That phenomenon wouldn’t be possible unless over-egging the omelette worked, would it? If it didn’t work they wouldn’t be able to showcase WTC-7’s perfect implosion from seven vantage points while having 90% of the population not recognise it as such, they’d have to do their psyop completely differently, in fact, they couldn’t have done 9/11 at all in the way it was without reliance on the limitless Emperor’s New Clothes effect, it wouldn’t have been possible.
The other really good quote is:
“All propaganda is lies even when one is telling the truth.”
This quote applies perfectly to the showcasing of WTC-7’s impeccable implosion. What 9/11 analysts fail to take into consideration with WTC-7’s collapse is that those in power rely on TENC’s effect for 90% of the population to accept the fire explanation (of those paying any attention that is). Yes, of course, it’s a no-brainer truth that WTC-7 came down by controlled demolition but the questions we need to ask are:
— Why did they bring it down on 9/11 when they could have brought it down discreetly as they brought down WTCs 3-6 later. In fact, when you look at the WTC at the end of the day on 9/11 it’s a complete mess, the other buildings were effectively destroyed, not just the twin towers and WTC-7. Obviously, explosives were used in the other buildings too to effect a huge amount of destruction on the day.
Here’s a more comprehensive larger image:
— Why did they showcase its destruction from seven vantage points?
WTC-7 was distraction propaganda getting everyone focused on how the buildings came down and away from other much more pertinent questions. What about WHO brought them down? What about that question? It wasn’t a bunch of dancing Israelis, that’s for sure. And what about the fact that most of the other buildings were effectively destroyed too? What about that question?
I’ve just written a post where I show how believers and disbelievers of the 9/11 story alike must accept miracles and absurdities. Sound paradoxical? Check it out. Actually, it needs some editing with regard to pointing out the obvious deliberate destruction of the other buildings but it’s fine to read at this point.
WTC-7 was NOT a distraction… It was demolished to provide the necessary erasing of evidence of the command&control center for the demolition (combo methods) of the other two towers.
In the Order of Futility, that still qualifies as s distraction.
Have heard about this:https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-world/trans-teacher-whos-gone-viral-for-wearing-giant-fake-breasts-defended-by-school-canada-oakville-trafalgar-high-ontario-transgender-prosthetic-boobs
That is very interesting. I no longer just dismiss things like this as absurdities, but rather crafted manipulations. It seems like a set up – let’s see how far we can push the credulous, shall we?
For some reason, I am thinking of the famous Voltaire quotation:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
The implicit assumption is: There exists healthy, standardised, normal society. ‘Political correctness’ is alien to it; it is an infection…Oftentimes the infecting ideas are labeled ‘communism’ (because the claimer has studied ‘communist propaganda’ and ‘communist societies’)…
The Tea Party, and ‘Trumpism’, are indicators of the breakdown of healthy, normal society. The societal breakdown is not due to infection by external agents…
Much of the thinking published these days can be characterised as using Infection As Metaphor***…”It’s a way of thinking.” (anon)…
Types of infection: mis/dis-information, heresy, virus, etc
** A nod to Susan Sontag’s Illness As Metaphor…
Suppress, Silence, Skew and CensorPropaganda, skewed study results and psyops, what could go wrong?
The name Cass Sunstein rang a bell. Ah yes, he opposed Bill Clinton’s impeachment. There are some people that we can do without.
God save the people 👍
He clearly belongs to the 1%!
Wake up up it’s everywhere in the world the powers make you scum but United we have each other if we band together they won’t have a chance put down your grievances to your neighbours now is the time to stand with your neighbours get rid of fake kings and queens they are done it’s our time the people.
People are starving in the uk I’m not joking go out to humanity we are starving.Go to America it’s the same.Don’t turn your back on these people they could be you.
Same in Australia, the homeless numbers are growing by the day, people are being kept in utter poverty by political choice and as we are run by fucking Murdoch the rich don’t give a shit.
From todays ‘budget’: UNITED KINGDOM
Strengthening the Universal Credit (UC) sanctions regime – Alongside these changes to the AET, the government will be strengthening the sanctions regime to set clear work expectations – including applying for jobs, attending interviews or increasing the hours – in return for receiving UC. Claimants who do not fulfil their job-search commitment without good reason could have their benefits reduced. These changes will apply across Great Britain. In line with usual practice, the government will work with the Northern Ireland Civil Service to determine the most suitable arrangements for Northern Ireland in due course.
Cutting people’s money off! Usually with random/poorly thought-through decisions that affect the worst off! The ideal solution to a crisis!
Did you actually read the document or did you just look at the signatures?
Is it in that document they advocate giving poison to only the most vulnerable members of society?
It pushes childhood vaccination, but it was released pre covid jab (on 4 Oct 2020) so it’s emphasis was on “protecting” the vulnerable; i.e. locking up granny and lots of “testing”:
Kulldorff, Gupta and Bhattacharya are all epidemiologists. However, there was never an epidemic; and quite possibly never even a virus. Consequently, their supposed expertise is:
a) highly dubious
Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.
Indeed. But they still have jobs at prominent universities. Denis Rancourt, who is independent (maybe not by choice?), and whose research not only shows there was no plague, and therefore empirically challenging the notion of a “deadly virus”, which the doctors you cite do not challenge while at the same time in contradiction posit that the same “deadly virus” is a mild disease. His research also challenges what have now become cottage industries of the Lab Leak Theory and the Early Treatment Saved Lives Theory.
Rancourt, surprisingly or not, was also an early challenger of the CO2/Global Warming Narrative TM
Regardless of that they attempted to mitigate the worst of the interventions.
There is no pandemic!
That is the four word declaration which they were qualified to make and it could have saved millions of lives. There were masses of experts who failed to make that declaration and they are all guilty of crimes against humanity – both morally and legally. However, by perpetuating the fraud of the pandemic, the three amigos suddenly found themselves in the spotlight and they felt important. As T.S. Eliot said (The Cocktail Party):
It would have been ACTUALLY important to declare that there was no pandemic, but they wouldn’t have been lauded by big money institutions and media networks (Koch etc). So they would have felt maligned and ignored rather than important.
The worst of the ‘interventions’ were those targetting the “vulnerable” which the great barrington declaration sort to uphold. You can watch Sunetra Gupta pushing a “vaccine” for “the novel corona virus” in 2013 whilst touching her nose and smirking. She said it was what would be “most desirable”: https://youtu.be/5HyMaitZ0pc?t=4000
Out of the three, I suspect Gupta was much more knowledgeable about what she was up to.
Initially, children of school age were not vulnerable. A year after jab roll-out with jab sales needing a boost, the Science changed to make them vulnerable.
The point of modern propaganda isn’t only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth.
Brilliant chess player, awful political analyser. Still thinking in the old paradigm of Putin being the devil and the western leadership doing all it can to oppose him. I am pretty sure that this quote from Kasparov is related to Putin’s actions in Russia and has nothing to do with what is going on in the west right now.
“Space is no longer the final frontier–reality is.”
Humilty is the final frontier, I always say because it is by far the least and last explored.
But I’m proud to be its first true pioneer.
And still they drone on regardless:
From that publication “What the Fuck Does It Matter?”
So how do you think they pick on what particular strain of covid drivel to regurgitate next?
No indeed, these are three distinct , separate, and well-defined medical conditions. Experts say it’s important not to get them mixed up.
So super-science me, man! What is brain fog, exactly?
…such as telling the difference between science and a hole in the ground.
Say something vaguely sciencey-sounding like “disorder of executive function” or “cognitive tasks” and most readers of The Atlantic (or The Groaniad) will simply swoon. Then you can have your wicked way with them.
FollowTheSciensssss™. Form an orderly queue.
Where did I put my glasses? Gosh, I must have brain fog!
The emperor’s new clothes again. Hans Christian Andersen was a genius who understood perfectly how it was the “smart” ones who were most easily fooled because they were the most vain.
No no no, pshaw, poppycock, it’s an old wives’ tale that the Emperor is naked. TheScience™ knows better. That child is suffering from a disorder of executive function, its ability to perform basic cognitive tasks (such as seeing clothes) impaired by brain fog as a consequence of Long Covid, no doubt caused by insufficient vaccination.
Everything essential about this ludicrous pseudopandemic had been noticed, demonstrated, documented, and stated definitively & unanswerably by thousands of people no later than the summer of 2020.
These chancers just keep lying because they can. There’s a war on, a war of attrition. It’s fucking exhausting because it’s designed to be.
“Sufficient vaccination” the final frontier, or “solution”.
Mengele would be ecstatic.
Read my lips: ALL human organizations are corrupt, period. It’s not a science exam. The most efficient organization is a partnership between two people. Sometimes it’s called a marriage. The odds of success? Erm… Pretty good IF no one resorts to lying…
Add a third party, and the odds of success plumet. Establish a committee, and all physical processes are delegated to non-committee persons. The committee soon becomes a political force… If you’re not on the committee, you’re a non-person…
The establishment of corporate organizations only dictates the terms of slavery… If you’re not part of the administrative regime, you’re become an object to overcome or defeat…
Let’s lie about it. Then hire someone else to tell us the truth…
Its not propaganda, its a government that loves and cares for you..
Its not the messiah, Its a very naughty boy (para).
The people of Liechtenstein appear to have had enough of the “health” measures, and said so in a referendum they were fortunate to be offered.
This is presented as a ‘failure’ of the referendum. 😂
What’s worrying is that only 53% voted against the measures.
“Randomised controlled trials of the injections to date have not shown net overall benefit, while accumulating evidence from passive reporting suggests they may be a cause of significant levels of harm.“
Spoken like a true academic. Piers, the virus/illness are complete fabrications so there’s no illness to protect against and there is overwhelming evidence that death and maiming resulting from the jab are huge.
Covid is a psyop and for psyops there is a particular MO for the propaganda: the mainstream and the various propaganda streams targeted to the anticipated disbelievers to undermine the opposition argument.
Any material that works with the assumption there’s a virus (natural or produced in a lab) is propaganda – some of it will be unwitting in that some people genuinely believe there’s a virus (natural or produced in a lab) … while some of it is very deliberate disbeliever-targeted propaganda, eg, Judy Mikovits and the film, Plandemic.
Any material that does not make explicit there is no virus/illness is also propaganda because propaganda is the opposite of truth so if you don’t make explicit that there is no virus/illness, you’re not speaking the truth. Unfortunately, academics are a little hamstrung when it comes to telling the truth.
Grasp that the media is a weapon and everything else follows….
Indeed, Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars:
A weapon with a potentially fatal flaw.
The whole media machine is so clearly dripping in the propaganda of the apparent agenda along with sycophantic support for the parasites who are advancing it. Every look and every listen feeds the machine and gives it a reason to be.
It’s aggressive and it’s extensive.
And it dies if we all look away.
The Quiet American
I called bullshit on day one and still shake my head at the stupidity of the hysterical masses who seem to believe that suffocation and poison is a ”cure” for a non existent thing.
I still experience true horror when I see photos or videos of masked audiences at concerts. Sometimes even the soloist is wearing a face nappy…
It’s like looking over the edge straight into hell, and it almost makes ‘ordinary’ war seem like no big deal.
Some of our ‘representatives’ – those who are deliberately doing this to us – are obviously not salvageable.
A strange move by the BBC today: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-63004082
Nothing forced them to report on this Hong Kong ad campaign at all, or to give it such prominence on the front page of World News, or — least of all! — to even mention that any of the plebs had ridiculed it. (Surely only vile “conspiracy theorists” and “anti-vaxers” would stoop so low?)
Suddenly, after 30 months, it’s permissible to be disgusted by this nonsense and even laugh at it. Suddenly this widespread scorn is newsworthy and deemed respectable. Why?
All BBC articles about “Covid” are very carfeully vetted, especially the headlines; so this story (trivial in itself) does mark some kind of turning-point in the propaganda strategy.
Hong Kong Covid: Double-masked flautists in ad spark ridicule
By Zubaidah Abdul Jalil
BBC News Published 6 hours ago
“…spark ridicule” at the end of a headline is like “Anger as…” at the start: it’s a signpost. It’s telling you what you’re permitted and expected to think and feel.
So the BBC could have headlined this story: “Anger As Anti-Vax Trolls Attack Covid Health Campaign.” Or they could have just ignored it completely. Or they could have made it a minor item in their Asia section. Instead, the Beeb chooses to post a big photo on World News and instructs readers worldwide that it’s now fine to ridicule masks.
Why indeed! You don’t suppose that someone at the Beeb suddenly broke free and screamed “No! You can’t stop me! I’m going to start telling the truth! HAHAHAHAHA!”
No probably not. Do they sense the tide of ridicule anyway?
I’m not sure what they’re up to there, exactly. Maybe it’s a one-off, time will tell. It’s certainly a first.
Could be a one-off, just to be able to say on the awful day of reckoning that they supported the sceptics all along…
Or perhaps they think it will calm us down…
Well, I decided 2 1/2 years ago that I was never going to forgive ‘the authorities’ (that includes the Beeb) for what they were shoving our faces into – either literally, or figuratively.
And that decision stands.
A set-up? To be followed by….and look how wrong they were!
The fake pandemic is much like the global warming bullshit, the rhetoric of which is about to descend on our heads yet again, using the same panic button as used for ‘covid’.
It seems the UN has numerous fields in which to gather shit and punt it to the public.
The rapid rise of extreme totalitarianism since 2020 and the submission of the populace is a grim indication of the power of the banksters and the weakness and credulousness and submissiveness of the people. The pressure seems to have eased a bit but the focus has shifted to economic collapse and the Ukraine (New Israel) psyop. The future continues to be uncertain and gloomy. Was convid the start of a war on the populace ? Why the shocking sadistic Orwellian excesses ? It appears inescapable that the banksters have realized that the edifice they have created is unstable and unsustainable and already in the process of collapse. Depopulation has been determined to be inevitable and the process has already been initiated.
It is not a new idea to posit a world of self-illusion in which we learn to turn a collective blind eye before we learn to think, such that masking adaptations for personal & persona survival in mother, family, and extended social relationships, operate as the self we present, seek to be seen in, and identify as our guardian, guide and protector.
This is not to deny a real world to persona-social constructs, but to recognise that the mind of masking in image and form is a series of shifting patterns overlaid or imposed on ‘What Is’ – such that we never perceive directly but always and only through a selective and evaluative interpretive set of masking rules and filters.
The patterns of entanglement of competition or conflict for right or just being is then set in archetypal drama of our primary relationships, running undercurrent to beliefs we are autonomous, independent and free. While such belief runs supported we can be-live experience as real that never truly shares, but finds mutual support in both alliances and oppositions. But when such belief is revealed partial, false and lacking substance, the deeper conflicts or fears that it masked over rise as disturbance that cannot be rationalised or understood within its own current mindset, and this results in the various doubling down or resetting of control strategies coercively by force as necessary lies, that are necessarily protected by a blind eye of masking unconsciousness – lest disclosure break the ‘little that ye hath’ to greater and total loss. Limiting the conflicted ego by denial of consciousness also limits awareness of all that we have and are, and internalises such rules as ‘official or socially accepted reality’ – the world to which we must adapt, or suffer rejection and exclusion – feared as both loss of face and control to a humiliation, damnation or lack of worthiness for life.
The decision to stay conscious or resist temptation to unconsciousness set in projective denials of self-saving blame, is not really by the mind we think we think in, but a movement of being, recognised, valued and given welcome in place of automatic defences blanking over a moment of felt connection to a reality we do not make and yet are integrally part of. That we cannot turn about to objectify, but can be turned about by so as to receive an expanded embrace or awareness in place of a distanced and masked defence system.
Some of this sketch may offer release from personal identity entanglements that effectively operate as a machined or programmed reaction stamping grievance, attack and fear from a currently attuned ‘past’ onto the presence that rises in the heart to be all that you are (the unfolding and sharing of). Such as to set ‘future’ as it repeating, under the illusion of escape, victory, solution – as if this time it will work.
Future is potential as past is experience, but presence is freedom to align in the extension of felt value as willingness to share in freedom lived as our endeavour and relationship in life. The usurping of our true life by a false is part of our current human consciousness, evolution or development. The depth of an invested stake in mis-taken identity cannot be released without uncovering that which truly identifies us – and everything. Attempts to solve conflict externally lock us into systemic conflicts running like a trojan horse – for we wanted to believe where symbols of life, love or power have been invested – and set against symbols of life’s reversal as hated evils given power by mutually agreed worth-ship.
The lie and the father of it run as ‘the deceiver’ or ‘Wetiko’ or ‘mind virus’. Anyone who thinks to judge, attack and deny it in an ‘Othered’ is not in their right mind, and thinks to stamp out wrongs in the Other – as in witch hunts, inquisitions or the many headed serpent of collectivised wokethink.
We invite and extend awakening from such dispossession or dissociation by the extension or with-ness of right-minded example (as in the sense of being of sound mind – not as being right over a wrong).
Attempts to ‘make another see’ what they are unwilling or unready to see, are not yet at rest in being, but set in a war that overrides all else – Or Else!
Isn’t that the nature of the psyop?
Terrible Evil Threat demands compliance NOW!
Is it not readily observable that we each have our own inner ‘gaslighting’ – excepting it only reveals cynical, hateful and blind when we move past or challenge it boundary conditions?
Looking within is not navel gazing, but the discarded Field of being to a mind set to look OUT as a mind unto itself, in its own spin.
Repackaging grievance, conflict or trauma puts it out of mind, by holding a split mind into dissociation. We have used this to ‘create’ with, by believing. Suspension of belief allows questioning what we have made of ourself, another, and world. But persisting as stakeholders to deeply held self-convictions set by fear, has set a collectivised mind in blind reversal as a call to unconsciousness, sacrifice and death as protection against full disclosure.
Yet fear of love, or truth – is fear of what we made of it.
Not knowing is then a self-honesty to that which knows and reveals to a willingness to be shown, rather than manufact a checked ‘reality’.
There’s a lot to write about with regard to propaganda, misinformation, managed opposition and so on, material that’s essential to understand the world that we live in. Unfortunately this article misses the mark by focusing on Covid and so in a sense could itself be thought of as an example of misinformation by focusing attention away from the story behind the story.
Covid is now just beating a dead horse. The epidemic, real or imagined, has run its course. It will still be around in one form or another for the indefiinte future but its not the same kind of threat it seemed to be three years ago.
The nature of individual liberties also needs to be better understood. This was brought home to me a couple of days ago when I was in a meeting with another old gent, a Vietnam veteran. If you were around during that time, living in the US, male and not in school with appropriate grades then you were liable for the draft. If your nuimber came up then you got processed into the military and part of that processing was vaccination — no messing, no protests, no religious exemptions, it was a line of recruits passing through a tent and being hit with one of those airguns you see in the movies. Heaven only knows what was in the thing. Obviously you could protest but you’d get jailed (or like others I know, you could leave for Canada). This idea that the government can make you do stuff seems unnatural in this day and age but its very real. This idea that somehow you have rights that governments must be forced to respect is utterly bogus and if you believe in it then you’re in for a very rude awakening. In an ironic plot twist the very idea of “human rights” is a propaganda fabrication dating from the Cold War (…you may have noticed that the only people who’s rights need to be respected are those who are serving our masters’ purpose, chiefly by providing examples of “Look how bad their government is” for our consumption)(try the same sorts of stunts here and see just what the limits on our freedom really are!).
Surely you must be able to see it now..? the fake binary which catte calls it. It called control opposition and other names.
Has Dr Piers Robinson read the fake binary article.??
The Sage thing brought to light by very untrustworthy military intelligence network U>k column funded by the Oligarchy is prime example of fake binary. Surely you must be able to see it now..? Sage appeared just in time to dilute and confuse the blame.
The fact they used the Big scary word communist to describe SAGE is usually a red flag and u.k codswallop sell that it the commi’s clap track hard (even the SAGE name was suspect)
U>K column’s job was to take the heat of the U>k government and make out they was being bullied even thought they did everything they said they wouldst do. Fake binary absolutely.
You got to be a sightly zombefied in 2020 to believe the government needs psychologist to control you. The fact your watching U>K column or getting your alt media news from a military intelligence network would imply your heavily under mind control already.
It was another fake as fuck binary.
Shill fest of fake binary he appeared and was brought to light by joke rogan audience and Robert Baloney was happy to take both vaccines.
He siad nothing and most people on the fence had either not taken the jab or had taken it. He said nothing. His job was Theater confusion and endorsement that the cult of white coats was ok..
Dr Tess Lawrie with respect to Ivermectin trials. Why would you needs trails on a gloried cold if that ? Again prime example of fake binary.
Ivermectin sold the illusion that bs19 was dangerous and more importantly it was real which it wasn’t.
I have no sympathy about theses doctors or professors having to take the vaccine when they issues death daily with there medication and torture treatment sold as helping. Again this was making general public alt media fanbase run to white coats as a form of title and accolades needs to win a debate – my doctor verses your doctor says crap. (trap)
One doesn’t need david icke doctor vermin coleman to tell them the medication industry is corrupt.
It is needing once again higher authority to make one feel safe. So a psyop.
Lord Sumption ffs another hero created by who exactly..?
Like clockwork he sold hard at the exact same time as Sir Desmond Swayne- Nigel fraud & bozo that the vaccine was a must.
RE: a Sunday time best seller book. I personality wouldn’t touch it a barge pole.
Why does ALTERNATIVE MEDIA regurgitate the same names time and time when they been proven to be highly suspect. Even by your own editor.
A couple of decades ago I read that 90% of the world’s media is owned by a mere 6 companies. I daresay the figures now approach 99% and one single company. Under these circumstances, the ones who have the ownership of this single company – or small number of companies – can stage whatever show they want. And their awareness of their power, allied to their barely concealed contempt of the masses, is the reason for some of the mockingly teasing articles about e.g. cow farts. They know they can say what they want and can even manufacture the presented response.
This would also explain “synchronicity conspiracies”, that so many people are into. E.g. the Matrix’s Thomas Anderson/Neo’ driver’s license expiration date: 9-11-2001. They are just fucking with us. Don’t say they don’t have a sense of humor…
What is Predictive Programming? | 100% Proof of Hollywood Brainwashing & Foreknowledge of 911. ODD Tv
Kinda off topic but it relates to the psychological reconfiguration of the masses:
The youth of today have been utterly abandoned. The last vestige of any genuine guidance is being removed and into that new vacuum seeps the deliberately mind annihilating buzz of this gender gloop which instils a deep anxiety over the development of sexuality – which is the most intense area of character formation and social acceptance. The young are being encouraged to mutilate themselves both mentally and physically as a covert depopulation programme aimed at reducing the “lower stock” whilst precluding anything like an organised opposition.
Great stuff George – keep swinging – love your comments
It does indeed relate to the psychological configuration of the masses. Almost everything we experience in Western culture now is a symptom of major engineered breakdown, creative destruction. Nothing should be seen as an isolated event. I’ve followed all this in my native country Germany, where cultural and natural values are overturned in an identical way and at the same time.There is indeed method in this all-encompassing madness which seems to have been engineered to confuse and keep humans in a constant state of anxiety.
Well said. Children and adolescents have always been their main target. For nearly three years now, they’ve been subjected to brutal and systematic abuse, sanctimoniously disguised as “care” and “protection” and “affirmation”.
Anyone who tries commenting at the Daily Mail website will know that they are regularly censored.
What’s even more ridiculous is that the censors claim that they ‘represent the people’.
Silencing happens all over the UK Press, plenty of the alt media too.
Spam check pending has become regular on here.
Most of the alt media are gatekeepers!
OT: Hilary Mantel has died “suddenly yet peacefully”. Another sad case of SADS?
That’s what I immediately thought, when I saw the MSM headline. I skimmed the article, which consisted mainly of relating her literary career. Near the end, it stated/claimed, “In spite of chronic health problems…”.
However, if she did have the ‘jab’, and that caused her death, that would be the cause, and not the ‘chronic health problems’.
I believe “chronic health problems” probably refers to endometriosis which she really suffered terribly from and didn’t have diagnosed for years I think but she may have suffered other health problems … if it was just endo that wouldn’t kill you suddenly even if it sounds like hell – I really feel for women who have it.