COVID: A media pack that asks no questions and puts out only lies

It is an odd experience, is it not, to watch mainstream media patronise us about “fake news” when their own version of “real news” suggests we probably know far more than they’d ever acknowledge.

Did you know….

  • That Covid19 has never been isolated….a fact best understood by following Christine Massey et al’s exhaustive research into the subject.
  • That Covid19 is an invented name for just another Coronovirus – Number 7 – since the series began a considerable time ago….check out Dr Simone Gold talking about this with clinical accuracy and at length on Bitchute.
  • This probably helps explain PCR false negative results, in that ‘…..a negative result does not rule out COVID-19 and should not be used as the sole basis for treatment or patient management decisions.It is possible to test a person too early or too late during COVID-19 infection to make an accurate diagnosis via COVID-19 RT-PCR Test. In addition, asymptomatic people infected with COVID-19 may not shed enough virus to reach the limit of detection of the test, giving a false negative result. In the absence of symptoms, it is difficult to determine if asymptomatic people have been tested too late or too early. Therefore, negative results in asymptomatic individuals may include individuals who were tested too early and may become positive later, individuals who were tested too late and may have serological evidence of infection, or individuals who were never infected.’ Or in short, “Yes and No with reservations”. (See Official FDA report for details)
  • Although only 4% of PCR tests are dubbed “false positive”, this nomenclature is misleading for one simple reason outlined earlier above: no test can detect Covid19 with accuracy, because nobody has ever seen it. The PCR tests identify the presence of Coronavirus in the patient, not Covid19 specifically. Six previous strains have been around for decades, and in older/comorbid patients with reduced-effectiveness immune systems this can easily result in death with a strain of Coronavirus rather than death as a result of Covid19. This obviously makes all tests and ‘case rate’ data based on PCR completely meaningless.
  • Despite that reality, self-assigned ‘fact check’ organisation Politifact insists that “the idea that PCR tests don’t work or result in huge numbers of false positives is false”. These days, one has to fact-check the fact checkers….especially those who ignore false negatives – and proudly proclaim they are “partnered with Facebook”. UK MP Rebecca Harris for example uses her constituency site to assert “You should only accept information from trusted health bodies and authorities. They have scientific evidence to support their advice, these conspiracy theories do not.”. Severely lacking from that blatant, blanket lie is one iota of evidence to support it. The FT asserts, ‘The idea that we are suffering an ‘infodemic’ when it comes to Coronavirus is attractive — and wrong’. Also a ludicrous whopper: there are in excess of 1.4 million official ‘anti-disinformation’ sites out there according to Google.
  • The greatest Fact-Checking False Fact output on the planet comes from the Washington Post. Some of the examples are hilarious, but I choose this one as most typical in its partial truisms: “While a cure for covid-19 would be more than welcome, no drug or other treatment has been found to eliminate the illness. Since the coronavirus emerged in China late last year, myriad false rumors have circulated about potential cures, ranging from drinking bleach to snorting cocaine”. Deconstructing this garbage, 1. There can be no cure for Covid19 because it is a rapidly mutating virus like the Common Cold 2. Ivermectin when taken in the right dosage at an early stage (or as a prophylactic) has been shown in high-quantity trials to produce close to 100% certainty of zero resultant mortality. HCQ + Zinc when used as a management drug after symptomatic infection reduces even older patient death rates by 88%. 3. President Trump was accused by WaPo’s Sister BS title The New York Times as “advising people to drink bleach”. A total lie, so something of an own-goal by the DC Dissemblers there. Trump did however not wear a mask, but chose instead to use the HCQ cocktail; Trump is a vastly overweight older bloke – when he became infected, he was up and about, fully recovered, within 72 hours. That’s quite a result.
  • Physical abuse of children during Lockdown in the UK is up a staggering 1500% compared to the three previous years – the British Medical Journal has the details on that one.

All I ask is that you now consider today’s MSM in the empirical context of that (whether you agree or not) well-documented account above…

Six excerpts from top British dailies to the left and above….do they strike you as relevant and informed?

I am forced to offer the opinion that they look and sound like a contemporary US radio sports jock commentating on the English cricket scene around the beginning of the 17th century….a bizarre voice-over during which references to a home-run or even a touchdown are made to seem important in the midst of spectators gambling on the oucome of the Great Sussex Creckett match of 1697 involving two wickets at each end, no bails and bats that seemed more likely to fly than strike balls made of elasticated cornflour.

How can we take any State/media response to a virus seriously when almost no members of the MSM Fourth Estate can even bear to contemplate the painful reality of an only skin-deep identification of the damn thing, a testing method on a par with mediaeval rules for outing witches, broadscale choreography of misinformation by purveyors of disinformation, and the use of heroic Black Death Eyam village isolation rules (when the 17th century plague killed 85% of victims) to control a risibly misunderstood Coronavirus variant currently killing 0.0024% of us?

Observe the ridiculous headlines: zero evidence that £15,000 per head hotel isolation makes any difference, new strains likely to wreak havoc despite assurances that both vaccines remain effective, the raw figure of 100,000 UK deaths without reference to deaths per million (a favourite Pharmafia ploy), “we” – interesting personal pronoun there – got something wrong and so “we” must keep our guard up, and nations designated ‘high risk’ on the skimpiest of evidence.

So obsessed is the Government itself with shrieking media hysteria, it seems almost incapable of defending itself against the “100,000 dead” drivel. We are the most populous of the top 12 European countries. On that basis alone – look at our deaths per million – we are roughly average. Then think about how deaths with and deaths from are not discriminated. Then look at the seasonal death totals. Then ask yourself why undertakers are not reporting business pressures causedd by excessive mortality. Then look at the hopelessly inaccurate positive or negative PCR testing data.

Why doesn’t Boris use this evidence? Why don’t the MSM investigate the huge data v drama mismatch? Why are they not so much miles from the ball as unclear as to whether they’re reporting on underwater Rugby Union or Russian tiddlywinks?

As I write, the Prime Minister is addressing empty green Commons benches about what comes next. His effort is an unhelpful mélange of jam tomorrow, more of the same, exit plans that depend on falling deaths, refusal to accept the clear evidence that there is no pandemic, a week here on schools, a fortnight there on something else, and not a clue as to how we pay for what it is heading towards an irreplaceable loss of £4.6 trillion in gdp.

The task for online commentators from here on is (whatever the moronic majority thinks) to focus on what we the victims of this nonsense can expect next from the arse-coverers.

Connected to this post: A Pilgrim’s Progress in the search for Truth