In a way, it's reassuring. Even with Big Tech attempting to censor every dissident opinion, there are still features of a Western democracy that have yet to be done away with – for instance, the CDC is still providing data that flatly contradicts the narrative that their leadership and other entities attempt to pedal. There will come a time when they will no longer feel compelled to do that; it's already well on the way. They are already massaging figures, failing to record statistics concerning influenza numbers, editing the VAERS database. When totalitarianism is fully upon us, they won't bother telling us anything that can be relied upon.
But for now, we are still in that interim phase, when we can still access at least some of the information that gives the lie to the official line. The irony is that it really hasn't done any good, as the mass delusion that has taken hold has blinded most people to actual facts. There is a weird parallel world out there – on the one hand, a plethora of readily available information which comprehensively disproves the official version of events and which is routinely censored (but usually not before it sees the light of day, however briefly), but which is known to a significant minority of the population. And on the other hand, the brainwashed masses who cleave to the narrative and who believe the lies they are told without taking the trouble to do any of their own investigating. This transitional period won't last long. But while we're there, let's make the most of it.
I've covered every topic that I believed to be relevant to gain an understanding of why Covid is with us and what it's true role is in the grand scheme of things. Due to the rapid pace at which the world around us is changing, there are one or two extra matters to mention; recent pharmaceutical happenings being one and a possible attempt to further terrify the unwary with a new threat being the other.
There has been the usual press hoopla over Merck's recent announcement that they have been trialing another treatment for Covid. This treatment has is called molnuprivar and is, allegedly, a similar product to Ivermectin; also made by Merck. You will recall that Ivermectin has been shown to be spectacularly successful in the treatment of Covid, at any stage of the disease. Many countries around the world (just not in the West) have been using the treatment both as a cure and as a prophylactic. However, there is one big problem with the drug that was a Nobel Prize winner in 2015; it's no longer patented.
Molnuprivar, on the other hand, is brand spanking new and about to go to the FDA for an EUA, despite even skimpier clinical trials than the 'vaccines'. It is said to be very similar in action to Ivermectin, thus giving rise to a predictable media debate (at least in rebel circles) about price gouging from Merck, given that the oral treatment from molnuprivar will cost $700, rather than the $26 it would cost for a course of Ivermectin.
The talk is that the drug is an antiviral that inhibits the replication of mRNA viruses, but in a less comprehensive way than Ivermectin. It is said that it copies one of Ivermectin's mechanisms, but not all of them and seems, on the face of it, to be less effective than its predecessor. There is reason to be cautious, however. This drug is pushed by the same company who denigrated Ivermectin, even though they were the developer and manufacturer of it. So, we already know that they are liars; the positive data on Ivermectin is incontrovertible.
Additionally, it is as well to be aware of a trick that has been repeatedly pulled on the public. Even when a transparent attempt at gaslighting has been attempted, the obvious refutation can also be fraudulent; an example of controlled opposition. For instance, when the wet market natural origins narrative was floated, the opposite claim was that Covid had accidentally escaped from the lab at Wuhan. A great deal of hot air was then expended arguing back and forth. What was missing from the mainstream debate was any mention of a possible deliberate release or any examination of whether there was even a 'novel' virus in the first place.
Similarly, with the 'vaccines'. The argument has been framed in terms that have been controlled by the state and its organs. Either everyone should have them because the 'vaccines' work but their immunity wears off (hence the need for booster shots) or the 'vaccines' aren't necessary for everyone, especially the young and those who have natural immunity. There is no mention of the fact that the 'vaccine' itself is toxic, nor any acknowledgement of the massive toll they are taking on the health of nations.
In the case of molnuprivar and Ivermectin, it may be worth ignoring the sound and fury and delving a little deeper.
According to research, the drug interrupts the replication of Covid mRNA in a process known as mutagenesis.(1) It interferes with the virus' genetic code. As a virus uses healthy human cells as its host and human DNA as its replication method, it would seem likely that the drug will affect these cells as well. Cancer is just one condition that arises from mutations in human cells. Very little else is known about the drug. But that fact alone is reason enough to exercise extreme caution. Instead (and once again), a drug will, in all likelihood, be granted an EUA despite criminally inadequate testing, with obvious question marks against both its safety and effectiveness and in a flagrant breach of ethics (inasmuch as there are existing safe and effective treatments already).
It's not just Merck, either. Pfizer is also testing a new drug. But what else can we expect? After all, the summer period has been relatively quiet on the Covid front, even if we expect fall and winter to be much more problematic. Well, there appear to be several possible plans. The first would involve the continuance of the current narrative, but spiced up with booster shots and flu shots. This plan has the benefit of simplicity and is also likely to meet minimal resistance, as it has been so clearly signposted already.
The second would involve lock-downs in order to combat climate change. It sounds unlikely at the moment, but this idea was being mooted at the back end of last year, on the basis that the Covid lock-downs had resulted in a vastly reduced CO2 footprint and we should, therefore, be doing it again as it's necessary if we are to save the planet. This idea seems to have faded from view lately, but its force should not be underestimated as the global warming narrative is still lurking in the background. After all, many of the tenets of Build Back Better are about 'sustainable development' and the like and it is well known that the Great Reset, as envisaged by the global elites, is justified by the usual fear porn about irreversible damage to the planet.
However, tactics are important. As a general rule, the longer that panic mode is engaged, the less effective it becomes. The best method is panic followed by some relief, rinse and repeat. My guess would be that summer has provided relief, especially as the current weapon of choice is a coronavirus; hot weather tends to render such diseases less effective. And it certainly seems that the seemingly endless panic of last year has been muted. The delta variant, despite the press' enthusiasm for it, has not cut a swathe through world populations, probably because (if it even exists), a late stage mutation will typically be more transmissable but less virulent than the original strain; such is the evolution of viruses and Covid seems to be no different, despite the best efforts of Western governments to mess with the process via the implementation of extraordinary measures.
The third possibility is the introduction of a new pandemic. It seems that after eighteen months where the overall world death rate has stubbornly refused to augment the narrative, we may now be seeing genuine spikes in fatalities; in the West, at least. These excess deaths aren't as a result of Covid. They are the outcome of the 'vaccination' programme. At present, there are huge rises in many conditions seemingly unrelated to the 'vaccines' but explicable by no other metric. The following figures relate to people between the ages of 20-60 and are in comparison to the average rate of adverse effects from all vaccines combined between 2015-19:
Pulmonary embolisms, at a rate 473 times the normal incidence rate.
Strokes, 326 times higher.
Deep vein thrombosis, 264.3 times higher.
Appendicitis, 145.5 times higher.
Parkinson's Disease, 55 times higher.
Deafness, 44.7 times higher.
Blindness, 29.1 times higher.
Death, 58 times higher.(2)
Additionally, it's worth noting that there are an extra 48,000 deaths in the US in Medicare patients, which occurred within 14 days of a 'vaccine' shot. These are not counted towards the official figure of approximately 15,000, as the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) has conveniently decided that patients don't count as vaccinated until 14 days post second shot. And, lastly, big rises in cancers have been reported, as well as noticeable increases in neurological problems such as tremors and seizures and also in pneumonia and sepsis cases.
At some point, these injuries will need to be accounted for. It seems clear that there will be no acknowledgement of any 'vaccine' involvement in these injuries, nor in the widespread incidence of further blood disorders, either that of clotting or uncontrolled bleeds. There is some suggestion that a new culprit is being readied in the wings.
It's as well to pay attention to the pronouncements of the Establishment players. A familiar playbook is often utilized and one of its features is that of repeated attempts to set the agenda, to soften up the public for what is to come. To this end, the activities of GAVI ( Bill Gates' Vaccine Alliance) are noteworthy. In April 2021, GAVI published an article entitled “The next pandemic: Marburg?”
“Marburg virus begins with a fever, severe headache and muscle pains. This is often followed by watery diarrhoea, stomach pain, nausea and vomiting, accompanied by extreme exhaustion and lethargy. Many people go on to develop severe viral haemorrhagic fever...Marburg can be difficult to distinguish clinically from other diseases. ”(4)
As a haemorrhagic fever, its symptoms could mirror some of the symptoms ascribed to Covid. There are other clues available. This is a disease that has killed less than 400 people since its emergence in 1967 and less than 20 since 2005. And yet, an academic paper has been recently published,(5) a PCR test was developed in 2018 and a vaccine is currently in trials. Why all the activity over a virus such as this?
Marburg's Disease is so named because Marburg, Germany was one f the three locations where the first viral outbreak occurred. The other locations were Frankfurt and Belgrade, Yugoslavia. All the outbreaks were traced to laboratories which were involved in the production or safety testing of the poliomyelitis vaccines. Allegedly, the virus originated from green macaque monkeys, yet no host has actually been identified and the monkey trappers who traded them did not come down with any illness themselves. Given that the virus is passed largely by fluid transfer, it is unclear how they all escaped infection but laboratory staff didn't.
In any event, there were only a few secondary infections and no tertiary transmissions. It is difficult to understand why this virus, in particular, has attracted as much attention as it has. It may be nothing, but it may not. Any alleged pandemic of Marburg's (not an actual pandemic, just another PCR test 'pandemic') would induce panic on a scale hitherto unseen. And what better way to ensure compulsory vaccinations. A credulous majority would not have a scintilla of sympathy for any Marburg's vaccine holdouts. Everybody would be caught in the net. It would fit the pattern and it would be a way to get a needle in every arm. So far, Covid has been the means to the end. Perhaps Marburg's Disease is the next level, a further ramping up of panic. Or perhaps there is another plan which we are currently unaware of. And perhaps whatever it will be has not yet been decided; it may depend on unfolding events or on the level of public pushback to the passports, or similar. But something is coming this winter. Further chaos is heading our way. Bon chance.
Citations