- Counter-Currents - https://counter-currents.com -

The COVID-19 Narrative Stinks

[1]7,241 words

What’s the deal with the Wuhanic Plague? There’s a lot more going on than medical and scientific concerns. Occasionally diseases do get political attention, such as AIDS. However, not even four decades of HIV have added up to the hype surrounding COVID-19 over the last two years. Just for beginners, did we have worldwide lockdowns over the AIDS epidemic?

Past generations lived through flare-ups of illnesses much worse than the Chinese Sniffles with far less ado about it, such as smallpox, scarlet fever, yellow fever, cholera, and so forth. During such times, our forefathers stayed out of public as much as possible for the duration, but the country didn’t get turned upside down, and politicians didn’t behave like a flock of agitated geese on laxatives. More recently, when there was a small Ebola outbreak during the Obama administration, the appearance in the United States of a disease straight out of Masque of the Red Death only resulted in a minor kerfuffle.

There’s something rather hinky regarding The Narrative about the present overrated plague. In fact, it’s fishier than Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot’s face [2]. Still, much of the following is speculative. Note well, it’s about raising questions that deserve some inquiry, not about providing answers with absolute certainty. This doesn’t describe definite wrongdoing, but merely the possibility thereof. Also, before everyone throws rocks at me, I’d like to make a couple of things clear.

First, COVID-19 is indeed a real virus. It is moreover a threat, though primarily to those with particularly serious preexisting conditions, especially if they are elderly. Generally these are the same people disproportionately impacted by other respiratory bugs. They, and others in contact with them, need extra precautions. However, it does not follow that it’s necessary to impose lockdowns on the rest of the population, which is at little risk. Some people do get severely ill, others only mildly so (I felt cruddy for two days and that was it), and others recover from it while remaining asymptomatic.

Also, I should make it clear that vaccination can be a safe and effective method of controlling infectious diseases — if done correctly. On the other hand, it’s possible for vaccination campaigns to be done badly. One example was the swine flu scare of the late 1970s, in which the vaccine turned out to have a markedly poor risk-to-benefit ratio from adverse side effects. In the present instance, members of the public should be free to obtain accurate and unbiased information and make an informed decision for themselves, without pressure or coercion, about whether they want it — or not.

Preliminary remarks


The Ministry of Truth hard at work

Should we just trust the science [4]? As a general rule, perhaps the “trust but verify” standard would be best. The major problem is that there is science, and then there is Sssscience ™. The scientific method is indeed a great way to apprehend the truth. In the realm of pure theory, science works flawlessly. On the other hand, Sssscience ™ always has an agenda. This is why so many studies lately have findings that aren’t repeatable and “proved” whatever it was that the company paying the researchers wanted.

When political agendas become involved, things really go catawampus: Franz Boas, Margaret Mead [5], Trofim Lysenko, Stephen Jay Gould — need I say more? (I’ll add that all of them have been called out for faking their keynote studies.) Those types aren’t dispassionate researchers seeking the truth — Veritas and all that jazz — but rather ideologues pretending to be scientists, using the mantle of scholarship to push their opinions as Sssscience ™.

For instance, radical gender theory has become an orthodoxy [6] in psychology. A “trans woman” therefore is no longer a man suffering from a delusion, but a woman suffering from gender dysphoria. Subjective self-identification overrules biology, according to Sssscience ™, and woe betide anyone who contradicts this latest “point deer, make horse [7]” shtick. This became so because of heavy political pressure, not because of any groundbreaking research.

For another example, Sssscience ™ says it’s a settled fact that man-made climate change is a looming disaster which will destroy the world in the next five years; therefore Western countries — and never mind about anyone else — must deindustrialize immediately, QED. They’ve been banging the drums about global warming since the 1990s, demanding sweeping changes to society as a remedy — or else. (Before that, there were predictions of global cooling, demanding sweeping changes to society as a remedy — or else.) However, the actual research into global warming is hardly so unanimous. Most climatologists don’t believe that the sky is falling, and think the generally Leftist minority of their colleagues are blowing hot air. However, the mainstream media isn’t going to tell the public that, because it doesn’t agree with their predetermined conclusions. Those types aren’t dispassionate reporters telling the truth — “just the facts, ma’am” and all that jazz — but rather activists pretending to be journalists, using the mantle of the “free press” to push their opinions as settled fact.

Likewise with COVID-19, the findings on it are hardly unanimous. As it happens, there are plenty of political agendas involved. There is one particular Narrative presenting a catastrophic viewpoint ; overstating the case, as we’ll see shortly. It presents universal vaccination as the only way to deal with it, and demands sweeping changes to society — or else. These changes are the much-hyped “Great Reset,” a package deal of globalist agendas which would erode individual liberty and national sovereignty while moving closer to creating a planetary plantation in which the peasants are ruled by a tiny exploiter class of extremely wealthy oligarchs. (Normally, Leftists would be especially up in arms about all that, but unfortunately they’re too busy complaining about microaggressions and making up new genders.) Viewpoints deviating from The Narrative get shouted down, as usual.

There might be at least some truth to what they’re saying. However, The Narrative is pushed by most politicians, some powerful international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), the mainstream media (MSM), the big social media corporations, and the new department of the Ministry of Truth calling itself “fact checkers.” Since these sources are well-known for producing more bullshit than all the dairy farms in Wisconsin, there’s reason to be at least somewhat cautious about accepting their messages uncritically.


Remember when the big NGOs told us it’s no big deal?

How do we know that they’ve been peddling BS? For one thing, the messaging was politicized from the beginning. When COVID-19 was still confined to China, the public elsewhere was told that there was nothing to worry about. The talking heads said closing the borders would be impossible and ineffective, that “racism” is the real disease, and all the rest of it. Then, as soon as outbreaks began in the Western world, the usual suspects reversed as if on cue and became full-time fright peddlers. Changing their tune like that didn’t take a bit of shine off of their official credibility! Since the drastic reversal happened pretty much simultaneously across the MSM, and since different media corporations are pushing the same talking points, it’s not much of a stretch to wonder if there’s an industry-wide transmission belt delivering the Party Line.

Here are two of these talking points. (Did several journalists in different media outlets really just happen to develop the same ideas?) The Lügenpresse told us that the massive George Floyd vibrancy around the entire country, which ultimately lasted three months, wasn’t at much risk of spreading the disease. (The mobs certainly weren’t “social distancing,” and the majority of them weren’t even wearing masks. When the MSM made excuses for them, it was practically an admission that all the security theater was a big farce.) Then they said the DC capitol sit-in, which lasted for only part of the day on January 6, was a “superspreader” event. Do the presstitutes realize that they made themselves look like lobotomized grapefruit?

Besides that, there are a number of embarrassing videos of politicians taking off their masks when they thought that the cameras had stopped rolling. There were also photo ops of them getting “vaccinated” while the cap is still on the syringe or the plunger clearly isn’t being pushed down. That’s quite a way to blow an attempt to inspire confidence! Some politicians also have been caught breaking the rules that they imposed on everyone else. The government told us we’d have to make sacrifices for “ten days to flatten the curve,” and I’m holding them to it. Since they’ve been jerking our chains for well over a year after those ten days ended, that should count as a broken promise. If they knew we’d be in for a longer ride, they should’ve been honest about it. Either way, all those politicians and talking heads need to enroll for a graduate degree at STFU.

The numbers game

There has been much pressure to inflate the statistics. Part of this includes financial incentives for hospitals, which received extra funding for any patients deemed to have COVID-19. Healthcare bean counters, being the wonderful humanitarians that they are, haven’t objected too much. Overall, there seems to be an uncharacteristic rush to judgment on diagnoses. Misclassification may account for why there were so few influenza cases (as officially recorded) in 2021. Some have speculated that this is because of preventative measures in place, but why would wearing masks prevent the flu but not keep COVID-19 from spreading?

Actually, I had personal experience of that. I went to the doctor (not my usual one, who is wise to all this) for a sore throat, and was informed that I had COVID-19 and could go somewhere for a test to confirm it if I wanted. I disagreed; this just felt like a sore throat, not what I’d experienced before. So I got a streptococcus test instead, which was positive. If I weren’t such an ornery pain in the ass and simply had gone along with what I was told at first, then I wouldn’t have received antibiotics that cured the condition.

The death statistics are likewise suspect. Surely some are genuine COVID-19 fatalities, and other cases –likely considerably more — are ones in which the virus was a decisive factor. However, it’s not always certain what the primary cause of death is. It also is possible to have a mild or asymptomatic case of COVID-19 while having a terminal case of some other illness. This is just like how someone can suffer from influenza while receiving a gunshot wound. It is possible to die from the flu, but in such a scenario, usually the bullet would have a little more to do with it.

This sort of thing earlier was part of the smoking debate. For example, let’s say that a morbidly obese 90-year-old smoker gets a coronary. Did the tobacco cause that, or was it mostly, or maybe entirely, because of age and diet? (For the record, smoking is terrible; don’t do that.)

The good news is that, at least according to some earlier statistics I saw, the death rate from all causes wasn’t abnormally high, as one might expect from a plague. This suggests that many of the fatalities were from comorbid conditions that would’ve been terminal anyway. It’s hard to draw the line sometimes, but in this instance, no attempt is being made to do so.

Perhaps we’ll never really know how many deaths were caused by the virus, hastened by it, or would’ve happened without it. The operating principle has been that any fatality following a COVID-19 diagnosis is assumed to have been caused by it, no matter what. Perhaps that’s why the motorcyclist in Florida [9] who died in a traffic accident was classified as a Wuhanic Plague victim. Misclassification would inflate the statistics, which is fundamentally dishonest. Obviously there are reasons why this is being done. Whenever death statistics have been inflated to push political agendas and milk them for everything they’re worth, it’s perilous to call out the scam — but someone has to do it.

Then there were the five Democratic state governors who ordered COVID-19 patients to be housed in nursing homes. Since the elderly residents were among those at the highest risk, what were the politicians thinking? For that matter, I’d like to know if it was even within their legitimate executive powers to make such directives, or did they exceed their authority? Perhaps a diehard cynic might wonder if the idea was to gin up more statistics. There has been plenty of criticism over that. Still, nobody got hauled out of their cushy governor’s mansions in handcuffs because they willfully exposed the elderly in poor health to a virus disproportionately affecting the elderly in poor health. Lately, one of them did get deposed for the monstrous misdeed of flirting on the job; running afoul of the #MeToo moral panic is obviously far worse than infecting senior citizens.

So there seems to be a pattern here: pressure to get as many COVID-19 diagnoses as possible, the mischaracterization of death statistics, and the nursing home business which generated avoidable cases. Could all this have been to frighten the public? If so, what is the purpose? Hold that thought for a moment.

COVID-19 vaccines are not preventative


Most vaccines will prevent infection by a certain illness. Someone who doesn’t catch it doesn’t spread it, either. Normally, immunization provides immunity. However, the COVID-19 vaccines are different. They don’t prevent people from acquiring or transmitting the virus. Instead, they’re intended to make the symptoms milder. (How well they actually do so, and if they might even be counterproductive, is another debate.) This isn’t speculation; this is what the manufacturers themselves are saying.

There are a number of side effects [11] being reported, sometimes fatal ones. Also, there’s been some discussion about the possibility that it might cause sterility in women; if this is true, surely it would please a number of globalists who have gone on record as advocating depopulation. These are subjects that would require another article to explore fully, but the ratio of risks to benefits is looking pretty lousy [12]. I doubt that these were designed to cause harm, but the problem is that they were rushed to market without long-term safety studies, and the MSM certainly isn’t discussing all the adverse reactions. The people deserve accurate information, and should be free to decide for themselves if they’d rather take their chances with the Chinese Sniffles or with the vaccines.

Curiously, the manufacturers have been granted exemption from lawsuits concerning adverse reactions to them. What other products are granted immunity (if you’ll pardon the expression) from personal injury cases? What kind of pull in Congress does it take to make a special arrangement like that? Why aren’t they more confident about the safety of their products? Is someone afraid of a repeat of the swine flu fiasco?

The fact that the COVID-19 vaccines aren’t a means of prevention isn’t a criticism. I’m not going to fault them for not doing things they aren’t advertised to do. Still, in light of that, there are some serious problems with The Narrative already. This much of it is because of the mistaken expectation that they’ll provide immunity like many other vaccines do.

For one thing, there are restrictions on certain forms of travel, such as cruise ships and international airlines, in which passengers must be vaccinated. Since that doesn’t prevent one from catching or spreading the disease, what the hell is the point [13]? The same needless security theater is pursued to a greater degree in certain places abroad, such as restrictions from going to bars or athletic events. (The most draconian restrictions nearly involve house arrest.) Could the point really be about making life miserable by denying opportunity for leisure activities until the public submits to everything demanded of them? Some educational institutions are requiring COVID-19 vaccination for their students. Some corporations are demanding that their workers get jabbed with these experimental products as a condition of employment. But since they are unable to prevent the spread of the virus anyway, there’s no public safety justification, and therefore such measures are tyrannical.

Unfortunately, there are lots of people who didn’t do the research, much like low information voters. They let their TVs think for them, and mistakenly assume that the COVID-19 vaccines work just as effectively as those against polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and so forth. They believe that everyone must get the shots to stop the worst plague since rap music, not realizing that the vaccines aren’t preventative. This small misconception has major effects on the rhetoric and on public policy.

Anyone not injected with this talisman of protection is a potential mass murderer, according to some. Ironically, they don’t realize that they themselves might be carriers despite having their shots [14]. Really, any rhetoric demanding universal vaccination for the sake of protecting the public from COVID-19, or in hopes of eradicating it, is badly misinformed. When government officials and VIPs talk this way, either they’re liars or they’re ignoramuses bossing the public around.

The one solution offered to the public

Again, some diseases do have safe and effective vaccines. However, most others do not. For example, even four decades after the HIV outbreak, no experimental vaccine has demonstrated suitable effectiveness against it despite tremendous research efforts. Thus, drug therapy is the go-to solution for most diseases. This is why pharmacies sell a great variety of medications. (Actually, some of them are quite effective at treating and preventing HIV, even if falling short of a cure. Some other drugs on sale provide relief for the particular type of coronavirus called the common cold.) For new diseases that emerge, a usual type of research is to see which existing treatments and medications might be effective against them. Big Pharma being what it is, generally they’ll prefer to develop new drugs which they can patent and sell at an exorbitant markup.

If an effective drug therapy for COVID-19 were to be found and made into a standard treatment protocol, obviously this could’ve saved some lives. Instead, it appears that this avenue of research has been discouraged. For example, an interview with a doctor [15] revealed the following:

McCullough explained that early on, as a doctor treating COVID patients, he came up with an early treatment regimen for those struck with the virus, which reduced hospital stays by about 85 percent, and said he began publishing papers on what he had learned. The doctor noted that he was “met with resistance at all levels” in terms of actually treating patients and publishing his papers.

“Fortunately I had enough publication strength to publish the only two papers in the entire medical literature that teaches doctors how to treat COVID-19 patients at home to prevent hospitalization,” he said.

In fact, those who do discuss existing drug therapies [16] and treatment protocols tend to get shouted down routinely. Vaccination is the steady drumbeat we’ve gotten from the NGOs, Big Pharma, the MSM, and so forth. If the medical community had similar tunnel vision about HIV, then drug therapies wouldn’t have emerged and AIDS would still be an inevitable two-year death sentence, as it once was.

The carrot and the stick

There have been some odd inducements to get vaccinated. For one thing, there’s the Ohio million dollar lottery program [17], as Richard Houck pointed out earlier [18]. Now that’s one hell of a bribe! Moreover, the funding ultimately came from the taxpayers, unlike most lotteries, which are a tax levied on people who are bad at math. California is offering fifty bucks or a ticket to Six Flags [19]. Also in the granola state, they’re handing out free junk food [20] in certain areas as an inducement to get vaxxed. (Personally, if I were inclined to get shot up with experimental chemicals that were rushed to market, I’d prefer the astronomically small chance at a cool million over a Big Mac.) Washington, DC is giving away AirPods [21] to bribe teenagers into getting vaxxed. There’s no rational benefit; kids are the age demographic least at risk from COVID-19, but they’re as much at risk from vaccine side effects as anyone else — or maybe more [22]. In some cases, Georgia is offering sentences reduced by half [23] to lawbreakers who submit to the needle. What a deal! At least that one isn’t something funded by taxpayers and then offered as if it were a free gift from the gummint.

Meanwhile, the public has been inconvenienced to an unprecedented degree: mask mandates, lockdowns, and economic chaos. The latter has been extremely detrimental to small businesses and extremely profitable [24] for a handful of huge corporations and the exploiter class that owns them. After a year of restrictions on liberty, subject to constant micromanagement and badgering and gradual impoverishment, the public is being conditioned to jump toward the carrot dangled before them.

Even Bill Gates Himself has told us that things won’t go back to normal until everyone on the planet gets vaxxed. (Who made Bilgey the world dictator?) Note well, taking the bait isn’t going to help. The usual suspects have no intention of letting the peasants return to their normal lives. Even the arch-globalist Klaus Schwab Himself said we aren’t going back to the way things were. It’s strange that the Big Cheese of the World Economic Forum — a Space Lizard from Planet Davos who looks like a Bond villain and is so New World Order that it hurts — is honest enough to admit it, unlike most other talking heads. He and Bilgey the Wanker should have a public debate about this “new normal” business.

All this coercion is quite unprecedented. I’m ancient enough to have gotten a smallpox inoculation, a disease that is 30% fatal; survivors merely have their skin horribly disfigured by scarring. I also got vaccinated for polio, which can result in paralysis or even death. I got the DPT shot as well; diphtheria has a fatality rate of 10%, and pertussis and tetanus can ruin one’s day, too. The 1970s being an immeasurably freer time than now, there was no pressure for me to get vaccinated against these very serious contagions, or any reward other than a lollipop at the doctor’s office. On that note, even plain old influenza can be fatal, particularly to vulnerable populations — though taking the vaccine for it remains a matter of personal choice.

Why are there so many threats and bribes to get a vaccine which isn’t actually preventative for a disease having a 99.8% survival rate? That’s a tremendous amount of pressure. Can’t we make up our own minds without all the coercion? Why are they doing this?



Be VERY afraid! fnord fnord fnord

Hopefully, all the above suitably demonstrates that COVID-19 has been made out to be worse than it actually is. Moreover, every effort has been made to frighten the public. The MSM often follows the “if it bleeds, it leads” rule. However, public officials more typically downplay problems. (Again, the MSM, the politicians, and the big NGOs told us that there’s nothing to worry about at first, then simultaneously reversed course and hyped the coof like it was something out of The Stand.) Meanwhile, the official response to COVID-19 is well out of proportion to anything in modern times.

When the AIDS epidemic emerged, there were no such draconian measures as what we’re seeing lately. The most severe restriction was closing the bathhouses in San Francisco. (This measure was resisted successfully for years by libertines in the local gay community who valued their cummies more than their lives, contrary to the warnings of sensible gays like Randy Shilts [26].) If the Reagan administration had merely tried to quarantine HIV patients forty years ago, by now the event would be remembered by Public Opinion as the worst atrocity since Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge wiped out a third of Cambodia. I should add that quarantining is usually about isolating the sick, not the entire country.

Also, the security theater measures are becoming increasingly onerous. Resident Bidet’s junta is even contemplating requiring vaccination for interstate travel [27]. (Once more, this is completely illogical, since none of the vaccines prevent catching or spreading the virus.) Obviously that would involve a massive number of road checkpoints, and of course the “your papers, comrade” shtick. There has been much talk about many other security theater measures as well. One bright idea that’s been floated is requiring people to wear masks at home — a pointless measure that obviously would be unenforceable, or do they want interior cameras spying on us 24/7? Some other discussions have proposed boosters [28], and at one time there was even talk of a booster every two months. They’re sure dragging this out, aren’t they? It would take a book to document all this sort of nonsense.

One might wonder if some of this is driven by bureaucrats whose nipples get hard by micromanaging other people and making them jump through hoops, but maybe it goes deeper than that. There is an old counter-guerrilla training film [29] discussing a particular stratagem: imposing curfews and putting up roadblocks in order to search all travelers. (I noticed security theater like that in Mexico, a couple of years after the Chiapas uprising. I doubt any Zapatistas got caught by the road checkpoints.) Obviously, the point isn’t to catch enemy combatants; surely they’d be smart enough to not get busted toting rifles on the highway. Instead, it’s to make life a pain in the ass for the civilian population. Care must be taken to promise the public that these are only temporary measures, and to blame the guerrillas for necessitating all the security theater. The spirit of these manipulation principles applies here.

Am I blowing smoke with that? Take it from two “medical analysts” on CNN [30]. One is the former President of Planned Parenthood, which surely is qualification for being the greatest humanitarian since Lavrenti Beria. A brief excerpt (emphasis mine):

“What really need to do at this point is to make vaccination the easy choice. It needs to be hard for people to remain unvaccinated,” Leana Wen said during a Saturday appearance on CNN. “Right now, it’s kind of the opposite. It’s easy if you’re unvaccinated, you can do everything you want to do anyway.”

From another talking head (emphasis mine):

“I do think it’s time to start mandating vaccines,” Reiner told CNN host Erin Burnett on Friday. “And I think that private industry and private organizations will do that.”

“75 million adults have chosen to not get vaccinated and that choice has consequences,” Reiner added. “Now, we can’t force you to take a jab in the arm but there are many jobs perhaps that can prevent you from working if you decide not to get vaccinated.”

Apparently they aren’t aware that COVID-19 vaccines don’t prevent catching it or spreading it. Maybe the Clinton News Network needs better “experts.” If people like that are discussing these things openly, imagine what’s being said behind closed doors in the halls of power!

Then there is the funneling strategy. Have you ever had “friends” who feed you bullshit to try to separate you from your money? They have some personal crisis, and the only thing that will fix it is if you open your wallet for a “loan.” They will never repay you, of course; keeping their weed tab current is more important, and then some other personal crisis will happen needing your wallet’s intervention. Every alternative means you might offer to solve their problem is a no-go; they have an excuse as to why all of them won’t work. Just hand over your cash, and they swear to God they’ll pay you back. (Wouldn’t it be awesome if Heavenly Father condemned them to an eternity in Outer Darkness for oath-breaking?) Meanwhile, if you decline their whining entreaties, telling them that you have bills of your own, you’re a heartless brute. Funneling means that every avenue to solve the problem is blocked, except the one steering you toward the outcome they want.

All told, this looks like a dialectic strategy [31]. How this works is that to push changes which would be extremely unpopular, the public will be manipulated to produce the desired reaction. Typically this is through a psyop to generate fear; exploiting a crisis for everything it’s worth — or generating a crisis as needed — will do the trick.

One example was how the 9/11 terrorist attacks caused the so-called “Patriot Act” to sail through Congress, leading to a degree of domestic spying that made the East German Stasi seem like the Keystone Kops. This police state bonanza is as unconstitutional as Ruth Babykiller Ginsburg’s hemorrhoids moldering in the grave, but some judge (who is an even bigger and more rotten hemorrhoid) made a loophole in the Fourth Amendment. Twenty years later, we’re still stuck with this “temporary” measure. I can imagine how the lobbying went. “Why, Senator, surely you’re not wavering about renewing it, are you? How can you be against secuuuurity? You’d better sign off on it, or radical Islam will win [32]!”

This also occurs quite often with the gun grabbers; whenever some nut goes postal [33], liberal politicians start beating the drums for more gun control and security theater. This also featured in the “Fast and Furious” program which kicked into high gear during the Obama administration. An interesting memo emerged from it, stating that selling lots of guns to Mexican criminals might result in a massacre which would be a great pretext to push for more gun control — wink wink, nudge nudge.

This is how it’s done, folks. Then there’s also the creeping gradualism strategy.

Your papers, comrade

[34]So then, what’s the deal with the funneling tactic to get everyone in the world shot up with vaccines of questionable safety and effectiveness [35] that don’t even provide immunity? There might be some side agendas. For one thing, some of the most greedy and power-hungry characters alive can present themselves as the saviors of the world.

For another, there are the financial effects, enriching the very largest corporations and impoverishing the small business sector. On that note, the President of Belarus [36] turned down just short of a cool billion from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to impose lockdown measures that were earmarked to crash the economy and impose massive security theater. How many politicians around the world were less scrupulous and accepted payola like that?

Is it perhaps about selling as many vaccine doses as possible, or would that be too cynical of a speculation? Sure, they’re being offered for free, but they’re paid for with government funding, which means the public opens their wallets whether they want it or not. Big Pharma doesn’t do this stuff just out of the goodness of their hearts; I could write another article about their predatory price-gouging.

The most troublesome prospect is that there appears to be an overall pattern in dangling the prospect of returning to normality before the people like a shiny fishhook. Again, if we take the bait, the problem is that the globalists and big NGOs stage-managing all this have some entirely different ideas in mind for the peasants. These are the people who tell us that in the future, we’ll own nothing and be happy [37]. They made a big laundry list summarizing their vision for the world after the “Great Reset [38],” which will be anything but normal according to their own words. Note well, these are only the things they’re admitting to in print!

The present vaccines wouldn’t be objectionable if they had a long track record of being safe and effective, having an acceptable risk-to-benefit ratio, and if the public weren’t being coerced with gradually tightening screws. However, all that is not really the point; vaccination may just be a pretext for other things. The major problem is in all the security theater being bundled along with these talismans of protection. If this becomes a creeping gradualism strategy, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time. Already there are vaccine cards. Those who don’t have them are effectively second-class citizens, barred from a number of activities, public venues, colleges, and jobs until they submit. This will increase every time someone on an authority trip — be it a bureaucrat, a CEO, a mayor, a governor, or even the Commander-In-Cheat — gets the whim to turn the screws a little more.

There have been discussions about using phone apps as vaccine passports; a year ago, anyone saying that was in the works would’ve been called a “conspiracy theorist.” (Big Tech will be quite happy to write the code and put in the infrastructure to implement it. Of course, this is the time for the libertarians to remind us that tyranny is bad only if the government does it [39].) That could easily become the first step towards a Chinese-type social credit system. Some of the New World Order types would love to implement microchipping, or perhaps use a machine-readable “quantum dot” marker [40]. That one was proposed by ID2020, sponsored by the Gates Foundation [41] — what a surprise — but the basic idea has been around for a very long time [42].

It may not go that far — especially if the public takes action while there’s still time — but proposals like that clearly represent the desire for a huge power grab. That’s certainly a lot of security theater to demonstrate that people have received vaccines that don’t even keep the virus from spreading. If it merely gets to the mandatory phone app stage, then everyone would be forced to leave a digital paper trail whenever they go in public. Refusing to participate, or even leaving the phone at home, would no longer be an option if you want to buy groceries. Maybe the point has nothing to do with public health, and is about tracking and controlling the peasants. Even with all the domestic spying that’s already going on, there are some petty tyrants who would be absolutely delighted to be able to trace the whereabouts of the entire public down to their every step, and to roll out a ChiCom social credit system here. Is that why the power-hungry politicians, neurotic billionaires, and tricky foundations are so enthusiastic about this stuff?

Was anything known ahead of time? [43]

Let’s put on our tinfoil hats and look into something rather odd. Anthony Fauci has been the drum major of the COVID-19 parade from the outset. As it happens, he had something very interesting to say in January 2017, just prior to President Trump’s inauguration:

I thought I would bring that perspective [of my experience in five administrations] to the topic today, [which] is the issue of pandemic preparedness. And if there’s one message that I want to leave with you today based on my experience . . . [it] is that there is no question that there will be a challenge to the coming [Trump] administration in the arena of infectious diseases . . . both chronic infectious diseases in the sense of already ongoing disease . . . but also there will be a surprise outbreak, and I hope by the end of my relatively short presentation you will understand why history, the history of the last 32 years that I’ve been the director of the NAIAD, will tell the next administration that there’s no doubt in anyone’s mind that they will be faced with the challenges that their predecessors were faced with.

That’s certainly more than saying that new diseases occasionally emerge, and he has a hunch there will be another one during the upcoming administration. Why was he so certain “that there is no question” about it, and how can he predict “a surprise outbreak” in advance? To make an analogy, anyone can say that at some point there will be seismic tremors in California. However, to specifically and accurately predict the Big One hitting in the next four years takes either a lucky guess or a hot tip from the Volcano Goddess.

It indeed could’ve been a lucky guess, but what would a diehard cynical perspective be? The cynic might wonder if perhaps he’d heard something, and his remark was predictive programming, or possibly a matter of running his mouth a little more than would be prudent. If not, maybe he owns a really good crystal ball. Or did he get a hot tip from the chief plague demon of Babylon? The cynic might say that it sounds like a dumb slip and he’s lucky he didn’t get cement overshoes. However, the opsec has been unbelievably sloppy all around — perhaps because of overconfidence. For example, what’s the deal with Event 201 [44] looking like a dress rehearsal? One would have to be remarkably trusting of the tricky New World Order types not to entertain the slightest thought that perhaps the dots might connect.

And so it came to pass. The Donald Trump administration, much hated by the Deep State that had been accustomed to picking the presidential nominees since Woodrow Wilson, indeed got a surprise outbreak. This just so happened to be in an election year. Side-effects of the lockdowns included economic turmoil, social isolation, and massive micromanagement [45]. Could this response perhaps have been calculated to generate an enormous cloud of discontent and make the public unhappy with the Trump administration? If that’s true, they still had to stuff the ballot box to get Bidet into the Residency.

It’s also interesting that the vaccine — say what you will about it — was approved three days after the 2020 Residential selection. The hoopla should’ve ended at that point. However, they want to drag this out as long as possible [46]. It’s working, and they’re playing the public like a fiddle with all the talk of more variants, more restrictions, and more hoopla. These cynical speculations don’t add up to anything that would stick in court. It’s possible that these things are all coincidental. Still, the timing seems awfully convenient.

Speaking of making predictions, Bill Gates likewise prognosticated about an upcoming pandemic a few years back. Since COVID-19 came around, he’s busied himself telling everyone what to do about it. (Although he seems to confuse having great wealth with having great wisdom, it’s true that he’s been an expert with viruses ever since Windows 95.) Since his statement wasn’t as emphatic and specific as Fauci’s, I can cut Bilgey some slack and say this seems more like inchoate predictions that at some point there will be seismic tremors in California. Even so, more recently he spoke of “the next one,” and immediately after, he and Melinda smirked [47]. What’s up with all that? They really need to brush up on their method acting; they’re supposed to look like they’re concerned, not like they’re gloating.

Since then, both bigshots have taken hits to their reputations. This falls short of being cast to the wolves; there are obvious difficulties for anyone in dealing too harshly with a weasel who might know some very interesting things, or with one of the richest wankers in the world. However, one might even go so far as to wonder if some tectonic shift has been going on behind the scenes that put them in disfavor. Gates has been knocked off his pedestal after his ties to the kompromat impresario Jeffrey Epstein came to light — did he perhaps plug his dongle into the wrong socket? — and he is also embroiled in a divorce [48]. Fauci is hanging in there, but worse for the wear after certain e-mails of his [49] were revealed. One interesting statement was:

Masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection.

Still, masking became a prominent part of the security theater measures that came shortly after. If that had actually worked, then we wouldn’t have much to discuss by now. The masks apparently turned out to be primarily a symbolic talisman of protection. (It seems that the cloth that most people have been using doesn’t stop viruses much more effectively than a chain link fence stops buckshot.) Lately there has been discussion about requiring people to wear two face diapers. What’s next when they want to up the ante — suffocation?

There was also the embarrassing business concerning “gain-of-function” research funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) at none other than the infamous Wuhan lab. Senator Rand Paul grilled Fauci over that in a Congressional hearing, and the latter denied wrongdoing. A New York Post article [50] defines this curious phrase more precisely:

Paul, an ophthalmologist, said the definition of gain-of-function involves increasing the transmissibility of a virus in animals to humans.

“They took animal viruses that only occur in animals and they increased their transmissibility to humans,” Paul said, referring to scientists at the Wuhan lab, as the exchange escalated in intensity.

So perhaps someone at that lab goofed, and the rest is history. At least that’s one possibility. Anyway, who the hell thought that was a good idea? Why was the NIH funding this kind of research? Shouldn’t the ChiComs be paying their own people if they want to weaponize viruses? In the spirit of Desi Arnaz, “Fauci, you got some ‘splaining to do!”


Finally, there was a bit of minor fanfare when the much-exploited Fakebook censors [51] stopped banning people for saying that COVID-19 came from a lab leak in Wuhan. (Before that, one could only discuss the “funky bat soup” hypothesis.) I’m not sure what kind of tectonic shift inspired this change in policy. Did the wet market story fall apart? Either way, if it’s permitted to blame Chinese researchers now, this is a reasonable cause to wonder if the rabbit hole goes deeper yet.

Could the virus have been released deliberately by someone, perhaps to promote certain globalist agendas? Last year, Ghana’s President did discuss this [52]. He also predicted that a deadlier form was being held in reserve, to teach the public a lesson if they began resisting. If he’s right about the bioterror plot, then it might even be possible that there could be some other clades in reserve, too — a sliding scale of teaching the public a lesson.

This leads to an interesting speculation. Could this be what the new delta variant is all about? It’s a biological rule that diseases usually mutate to become less deadly, which should be especially so for those with a fast incubation period. It’s against the interests of a parasite to kill its host — something these globalist billionaires apparently haven’t learned. Therefore, even without any intervention, COVID-19 should eventually evolve into a fairly unremarkable respiratory bug. In that case, it’s rather strange — though not absolutely impossible — that a stronger variant would emerge all by itself. What’s up with that?

Another view is that the variants are actually being caused by the vaccines [53]. This has been proposed by Luc Montagnier, a virologist and Nobel Prize winner — it’s hard to accuse him of being a nut — who has caught an incredible amount of politically-motivated heat. With the exception of the Pfizer shot, these are mRNA vaccines. They work by infiltrating cells and using them to mass-produce proteins, which is not so different [54] from how an actual virus works. Note well, I can’t say with certainty what caused COVID-19 or its variants, but it is an interesting question.

However, if it turns out that the exploiter class did have something to do with releasing COVID-19, the 0.001%ers should be aware that the cat is out of the bag about their hidey-holes in New Zealand [55]. If they do indeed have something to get off their chests, this would be a fine opportunity for them to knock it off, beg the public’s forgiveness, and cut it out with their hubris forever.

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here: