"Are we really living in the midst of a deadly plague?" Parts one and two, by Miri
Sabateur posted an article from Miri AF in the comments, which I was impressed with. Very interesting writer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Are we really living in the midst of a deadly plague? Part one.
If you look at world population figures and global death rates over the past ten years, you will see 2020 - the year of the deadliest plague ever known to man - was in no way remarkable. The global population increased (yes, increased), by 1.05% - a slight decrease on 2019's 1.08% increase, which was a slight decrease on 2018's 1.10% and 2017's 1.12%.
(Source: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/....)
In other words, the change between 2019 and 2020 was absolutely no different to the change between other recent years. The population increases every year, but that increase is declining by a couple of decimal percentages every year. This has been the consistent trend for years and 2020 was absolutely no different.
That alone should be the conclusive evidence as to whether a deadly plague is really ravaging the globe or not (for the logic impaired, of which there alarmingly seem to be many millions - it isn't).
To focus on the UK, the overall all-cause mortality rate in 2020 was 9.4 deaths per 1,000 people (source: ONS), which is completely normal. I know the media would have us believe we were all immortal until coronavirus came along, but alas, t'is not so (unless one happens to be Keith Richards). In the UK, in normal, non-plague times, approximately 1,400 people die every day.
If there was a screaming news headline today saying, "OMG, OVER A THOUSAND PEOPLE DIED TODAY, THE PLAGUE IS UNSTOPPABLE!" - half the nation would immediately imprison themselves in their homes in hazmat suits (I know there's someone in the world right now taking a shower in a mask, I just know it), paralysed by undulating terror due to this horrifying figure.... Yet this is a completely normal and unremarkable number of people to die. There are over sixty million people in this country, a lot of them are old, and - I know this will come as a staggering, paradigm-shattering shock to many - when you have been old for a long time, you die.
Death in itself is not a tragedy. Premature death is a tragedy, but if someone is 96 and has lived a full life and dies peacefully at home surrounded by loved ones - well, that's the best that any of us can hope for and there's nothing tragic about that. It's sad, yes, but not all sadness is tragedy, so let's get some perspective - the one thing that is sorely lacking in this whole preposterous pantomime, and if we could just get some, the curtain would finally fall and we could get back to normal (or, the less tyrannical iteration of abnormality we had beforehand, at least...).
If you are in the midst of a real deadly plague, you don't have to constantly propagandise the public to remind them about it, since they all know - all too painfully clearly. All families have been touched ("bring out yer dead!" and so forth) and the role of the state and the media in such a situation is to promote and maintain a sense of calm, as the last thing you need in a genuine emergency is a country full of petrified people, since - as is well known by all behavioral science - frightened people don't think or behave rationally, and thus become a serious liability.
If you are a soldier in a war zone, does your commander want you to be a) a terrified wreck unable to leave base or perform your duties as you are petrified you might die, or b) calm and focused and able to continue to perform your duties optimally, despite potential danger? In the UK in the blitz, was the media constantly pumping out "OMG, BOMBS, DEATH, YOU'RE ALL GOING TO DIE IF YOU DON'T STAY IN YOUR BUNKER!!!", or was the UK war effort in fact well known for the slogan "keep calm and carry on"?
In a real emergency, keeping the population in a permanent state of terror would be completely counterproductive at every level. That's (yet another) way you know we're not in a real emergency, and for even the most die-hard of plague enthusiasts, surely you don't believe there is more of an imminent threat to your life now, than in the war, when actual bombs were being dropped in the nation's back gardens multiple nights a week? Yet then, the advice was to "keep calm and carry on", and now it's "EXIST IN PERPETUAL TERROR AND NEVER LEAVE YOUR HOME OR INTERACT WITH OTHER HUMANS EVER AGAIN".
In addition, when a country is in the midst of a genuine life-threatening emergency, that country does not need to perform extraordinary sleights of hand regarding hospital admission and death figures, to convince others the emergency is real. In a real emergency, hospitals really are full, and you don't need to:
*Conflate "virtual wards" (e.g. people's own living rooms) with hospital admissions (yes, the sacred, holy NHS does this)
*Put 'Covid-19' on a death certificate even when no Covid test has been carried out (common practice)
*Put Covid-19 on a death certificate even when someone was terminally ill with longstanding cancer, heart disease or other serious illness (happens all the time)
I could go on (and on and on), but I think you get the point.
This is all a hoax. A mirage. There is no viral pandemic and never has been. All you need to do is the most rudimentary of statistical analyses and that fact becomes abundantly, irrefutably clear. You can also speak to funeral directors and ask, were you busier than usual in 2020? They all say no. Many had their quietest period for years - until the vaccine programme began. Then they saw an abrupt upswing in deaths, which has continued to steadily rise as the vaccine programme intensifies.
So are we going to see significantly increased deaths this winter? Yes, I'm afraid we are. But if people cannot see that the fact there was NO increased death whilst we were in the throes of "world's deadliest plague", but there IS now we have the supposed "remedy" for it suggests something is a little awry here...
All that is happening right now is that warfare has upped its game very significantly. War started with tribes throwing rocks at each other, and escalated over the centuries to involve sophisticated technologies, tanks and bombs, but the evolution of warfare didn't just stop there - why would it?
Modern warfare realises the kill rate will be much higher if you can convince the enemy to administer the fatal "shots" to themselves. When people know they are under attack, they resist it and fight back. If you use psychological warfare to convince them the enemy forces are actually their friends who want to "help them" and that the deadly poison is "medicine", there is no resistance and they line up for it. It makes perfect, and painfully obvious, sense.
All you need to do is make the poison slow-acting and dependent on cumulative doses - which even your most amateur aficionado of poison could confirm is not difficult - so the connection is not made between administration of the shot, and death. A period of several months is plenty of time for plausible deniability and the "coincidence" defence - or, of course, to blame the death on "the new variant", consequently scaring even more people into lining up for the death shot.
That's so OBVIOUSLY what's going on that, short of mass hypnosis, there is no way anybody would not be able to see it. But of course, mass hypnosis is exactly what the nation is under, and so all the easily verifiable facts in what I've just written above will be dismissed, derided and mocked as "crazy conspiracy theory".
And is it crazy? It most certainly is. The plans of ruthless psychopaths tend to be. Is it a conspiracy? Of course it is: the ultra-wealthy and powerful orchestrators of world events have got together and conspired - it's kind of what they do. But it's no theory. It's happening.
In closing, I will just say this: never take health advice from people who think the world is overpopulated. I shouldn't have to explain that one.
Source: Miri AF
Are we really living in the midst of a deadly plague? Part two.
I wrote a post the other day analysing, based on statistical data and facts, whether we are currently in the midst of "a deadly plague" (spoiler alert: we're not). Here's the post.
It wasn't emotive or propagandist, it was just factual, based on one ineffable fact: if you are in the midst of a deadly plague, then the overall death rate goes up. The death rate in 2020 didn't (indeed, the global population increased). That's it, really, end of story, open and shut case.
I knew no plague aficionados would argue against that, since they cannot, but I did get the old chestnut:'
"May I ask how many people YOU have lost to Covid?"
(Translation: "You cruel, heartless monster, this terrible pestilence is ravaging the nation's families and striking down people in their prime, you just wait until it happens to YOU and then you'll see!")
This is the only rebuttal they ever seem to have, and I sympathise with the fact that they genuinely believe it (the propaganda these last few days, as predicted, has really intensified to grotesque new levels of evil and so I try - with varying degrees of success - to reserve my real contempt for those who produce it, rather than those who fall for it).
First of all: when I say "the death rates were the same as normal last year", this is not synonymous with saying "nobody died last year", which is what people seem to hear. Did tens of thousands of people die last year? Yes. Was this in every circumstance sad for those who knew them? Yes. Were some of these deaths premature, tragic, and likely preventable? Yes.
But that is so every year, and has been all throughout human history. Every year, all across the world, tens of thousands of people die, leaving bereft families, grieving friends, and, in some circumstances - such as the death of a child - irreparable heartbreak. Nobody is suggesting such situations are not devastating and fully deserving of our acknowledgement and empathy.
What we "cruel, heartless monsters" are suggesting is that 2020 was no different to any other year in this regard, and so, if you didn't spend any other year living in quaking terror of the imminent spectre of death and allowing your entire life to be dismantled to "protect you", why did you permit it in 2020? Objectively and based on irrefutable statistical facts, there was no more risk to you or anyone else in 2020 than any other year.
The only difference between 2020 and every other year is that, suddenly, the media started scaremongering you with repeated reports of death. They don't do that usually. Usually, the media only reports on death if it concerns someone famous. They don't issue daily reports about all the chronically unwell and elderly who die every day (roughly 1,400, in normal, non-plague UK), thus giving the general public the impression death is a relatively rare event. We are all only personally connected to a few hundred people, and so we are not used to hearing about death that much.
All the media has done (first rule of successful marketing) is reframe your perspective, by suddenly starting to report on the deaths of lots of ordinary people, thereby giving you the impression death rates have suddenly, dramatically shot up, when, in fact, they haven't (or, they hadn't until the vaccines began to be administered, at which point they began steadily creeping up).
Now, a person may say, "well, maybe death rates have stayed the same, but that's only because all the restrictions worked! If we hadn't had restrictions, they would have been much higher!" - a position that is easily rebutted by pointing to Sweden and other countries that didn't lock down. Those who did not impose restrictions had the same (normal) death rate as countries that did, or they had lower death rates.
The next objection may be, "well, maybe deaths didn't increase, but people are dying of a new terrible disease and so we need to take precautions to stop it getting worse!"
What is critical to understand here (and this is not 'denying' respiratory illness, which sometimes kills people, exists) is that there is no conclusive evidence the novel coronavirus referred to as "COVID-19" exists, because it has never been isolated in a lab, or fulfilled the gold standard of virology for identifying new viruses, Koch's postulates.
The PCR and lateral flow tests that purport to detect it CANNOT and DO NOT accurately test for novel viral infectious illness, and if you 'trust the science', then presumably you trust the scientist who invented the PCR test, who stated this unequivocally and repeatedly, and all the other scientists who have spoken out in the British Medical Journal, The New Scientist, and The Guardian, detailing at length how and why the lateral flow test is completely inadequate and unreliable. Please note also that inappropriate use of PCR testing is renowned for creating false "epidemics" and attendant hysteria, as happened in the USA in 2007. Everything I've just mentioned in this paragraph has been confirmed by mainstream news reports, please see links in footer.
So, let me make this very clear: there is no reliable way of testing for "COVID-19", therefore there is absolutely no way of gauging accurate figures over how many people - if any - have even contracted it, let alone died from it. And even if the tests WERE reliable (which they absolutely are not), simply 'testing positive' for a virus does not mean that virus is responsible for someone's illness or death. The human body is full of viruses. A terminally ill cancer patient may test positive for all sorts of viruses, so may someone fatally injured in a car crash - that doesn't mean these viruses played any role in their death.
So, when someone says "I know someone who suffered an agonising respiratory illness and died" - I am not 'denying' this happens. What I am doing is explaining why this is not evidence of a "deadly pandemic" or reason to terrorise the population and shut the country down. (And if someone with a respiratory illness goes into hospital, then, as I have detailed in previous posts, they are very likely to receive completely inappropriate treatments that will do nothing but expedite their demise.)
Moving on to the final, emotive part of "how many people do YOU know who've died of Covid", this is founded on a fundamentally false premise, which is that I am authoritarian enough to believe that, if something negatively affects me, it should be banned for everyone else, e.g. if I knew someone "who had died of Covid", it would follow I would want lockdowns, masks, tests, quaxx!nes, etc.
Well, that doesn't follow, because I haven't got an authoritarian personality (a disturbingly large segment of the population clearly has) and I understand that life is inherently risky, and part of free will is deciding for yourself what risks you will take - you are the arbiter of that choice, not anyone else. Far more people throughout history have been killed on the roads and through alcohol than by any cold virus, and yet, I would never suggest cars or booze should be banned.
Do I know people who have died in car crashes? Yes (and young people, too). Do I know people who have died from drinking? Plenty, unfortunately.
But it is a completely false premise to assume a healthy adult mind would therefore make the leap, "and so these things must be banned for everyone in order to keep me safe".
So EVEN IF all the propaganda about "Covid" were true (and not a word of it is), I still would not support the restrictions, because the Government is not responsible for "keeping us safe". It is responsible for protecting our rights - and that is its only legitimate job. (And, just in case this needs clarifying for anyone, never contracting a cold virus is not a 'right'.)
If the Government wishes to issue "guidelines" over what it believes are healthy behaviours, then it can, as it does with diet, drinking, smoking etc. But its authority stops a long way short of forcing people out of their jobs and into house arrest because it claims to believe this is "safe" for them.
It's quite simple: if you fall for Government propaganda and believe wearing a mask, injecting mRNA, and staying at home protects you from anything, then you do that. However, you have absolutely no right whatsoever to impose it on anyone else - including and especially if you have 'MP' after your name.
As for "overwhelming the NHS", I have no contract with the NHS, a body which has non-consensually extorted money from me all my life, and it purports to exist to serve me, I most certainly do not exist to serve it, so I do not consider the NHS when making decisions about my health - not least because I consider the NHS an organised criminal monopoly that specialises in mass murder, and I would therefore like to have as little to do with it as possible. I and most of my fellow conspiraquacks would be QUITE happy to sign a document stating that if we develop so-called "Covid symptoms" (cold / 'flu / hay-fever) we want nothing to do with any NHS hospital, who would likely attempt murder-by-midazolam or tortuous and usually fatal "ventilation".
So, there we have it. Next time someone asks "how many people have
YOU lost to Covid", I'll link them to this. They might *slightly* regret
asking.... 
------
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html
https://blogs.bmj.com/.../covid-19-government-must.../
https://www.newscientist.com/.../2263746-test-caught.../...
https://www.theguardian.com/.../experts-call-for-rethink...
Source: Miri AF
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Post-Partisan Emporium's Purpose and Standards
This site does not have a particular political position. We welcome articles from various points of view, and civil debate when differences arise.
Contributions of articles from posters are always welcome. Unless a contribution is really beyond the pale, we do not edit what goes up as topics for discussion. If you would like to contribute an article, let one of the moderators know. Likewise if you would like to become an official contributor so you can put up articles yourself, but for that we need to exchange email addresses and we need a Google email address from you.
Contributions can be anything, including fiction, poems, cartoons, or songs. They can be your own writing or someone else’s writing which has yet to be published.
We understand that tempers flare during heated conversations, and we're willing to overlook the occasional name-calling in that situation, although we do not encourage it. We also understand that some people enjoy pushing buttons and that cussing them out may be an understandable response, although we do not encourage that either. What we will not tolerate is a pattern of harassment and/or lies about other posters.
Comments
Post a Comment