In General Eisenhower’s last farewell address, he asked of the public to be increasingly vigilant of the rise of the Military Industrial Complex. But what is less known is the second warning – against Technocratic Rule.
“In holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite”.
What the Covid-19 pandemic showed us, is the public health officials were following “the science” not to understand the mechanisms behind the coronavirus, but rather to patronize us, inculcate fear and therefore artificially create a new demand for their supposed superior knowledge.
In the name of upholding the standards of public health, they did the exact opposite by shutting down legitimate inquiry into their now disproven models, mask mandates and silly antisocial distancing restrictions, while also denying the obvious hidden Gain of Function Research that was going on in Wuhan. By early 2020, the journalist Sam Husseini already reported about the works at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Chinese Lab’s ties to the vaccine alliance GAVI and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. What was the response of the public health authorities?
“Please shut up conspiracy theorist, there is nothing to see here.”
Sensible people should be asking, if they lied to us up until now, what else are not they lying about right now?
Try as they like, these scientists cannot run away from the fact that “following the science” is the attitude that is responsible for botching up the pandemic response, inculcating public distrust and for disrupting our lives.
A small background in epistemology tells us the scientific method is never an appeal authority, but rather a method of inquiry. This is where Karl Propper and FA Hayek made the distinction between scientism (“the science”) and science. Epidemiologists claimed that the knowledge of Nostradamus were coded into their computer screens and when scientist such as Stanford’s John Ioannides pointed out that the data going into the models were unreliable, they did not go on a course correction, but rather doubled down on their lucid death fantasies.
This totalitarian nature of scientism effectively shut down the legitimate arguments of those scientists who questioned the restrictions, the lockdown, the dark history of rushed vaccine, and the efficacy of alternative therapeutics. The authorities did not respect the value of civilian audit, but instead responded with a paternalism and media hit pieces. The public has paid the highest price in both human lives and economic misery, and I am not holding my breath for an apology from the scientific council of Nicaea. Let us look at the plausibility of their claims, because almost every aspect of the official narrative now appears to be as Canadian Pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson recently said, “a pack of lies”.
With Rising Covid-19 cases, South Africans are now being told that the third wave is going to be worse than the second. But this takes us back to the GIGO problem of using computer models to inform public policy – garbage in results in garbage out. How can one make a prediction without reliable data? Model predictions remain a form of 21st century prophesy that serves to inculcate terror and propaganda by exaggerating risks. The Afrikaans Burger Newspaper reported that South Africa’s 3rd wave was supposed to be on the 15th of May, but now it only comes early in June?
With fear mongering scientists have managed to grant themselves a social status that they would never have obtained under normal circumstances and one can see that they are drunk on this newly achieved rank and hierarchy.
Using fear to constantly predict catastrophe will backfire as it almost always incentivizes abusing the “precautionary principle” i.e. to try and force a zero Covid policy with no regard for a cost benefit analysis. The best example of this is the UK government’s SAGE response that used the most deliberate and appalling form of propaganda as they consciously applied behavior economics and behavioral psychology onto their own people. The government’s official document notes that the population must be hit with “hard-hitting emotional messages”.
Now surfacing on the internet is that the government already investigated using behavioral psychology to public policy as early in 2010 with the Mindspace Program in collaboration with French. Two members of the UKs SAGE team were part of the MINDPSACE Program David Halpern and Domonic King.
The UK Column reports that the British population is being treated as Pavlov’s Dogs and by extension we can say South Africans as well. This modern-day torture technique should not be surprising as suicide rates had gone up in England and Wales. A whistleblower from the BBC holds the media editors criminally neglectful over the Covid-19 scaremongering.
When Sweden did not go into lockdown, we were all told that they were all going to die, but they did not. In fact, Sweden reported no excess death rate for 2020 in contrast to countries that had a lockdown. With the USA states Florida and Texas opening by late last year, a similar story was seen as Covid-19 stayed on its natural trajectory and did not show a massive spike in new cases. In fact, lockdown heavy states performed worse than those that opened. Sensible people would ask if it were perhaps lockdowns that is causing all the excess deaths and we can’t we adopt a focused protection system that aims to vaccinate the only the old and the vulnerable while the working well keeps the economy going?
By implication that the working well should not be deprived of their livelihood and that they should not have been prohibited from taking the relatively low risk for themselves.
Sweden showing no excess deaths for 2020 in contradiction to what the models predicted.
The rigid response from South Africa’s scientists to the public has been a stark “No”, please do not think for yourself and believe in our models, they did not work last time, but now we have figured out the bugs in our code.
With the evidence coming out that natural immunity from Covid-19 is probably just as good as vaccination, one has to ask the reasonable question if outside of the at risk population, full vaccination is actually desirable given that long term safety data only come out by mid 2023? Especially since we now know that there are alternative therapeutics available such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine that have been replicated and peer reviewed in various countries around the world. South Africa should be proud that our own Dr. Tess Lawrie has shown in her independent meta-analysis that the WHOs evidence against Ivermectin that SAHPRA cited is simply fraudulent.
One can go further to point out that children do not transfer this disease and that school closures should never have occurred, but objections based on data and sensible analysis have fallen on the deaf ears of health officials who have invested too much into our abuse that they simply cannot change their minds. Take South Africa’s Dr. Francois Venter for example, who suggested that children hugging their grandparents is a ‘risky activity’, but while obfuscating the fact that social isolation can be as good as a death sentence to fragile old people.
This belief in scientism as opposed to science led to the rigid reaction that regulatory authorities had against therapeutics that simply went against their preconceived doctrines. The social and mainstream media, along with the clearly conflicted regulatory authorities obviously bowed before big pharmaceutical companies that they depend on for their advertisement. They knew on which side their bread was being buttered. SAHPRA according to their own 2020 annual reports received R45.4 million from the Gates Foundation, meaning that they simply cannot be seen impartial in their judgement.
Despite the remarkable disinformation campaign both Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin have shown efficacy in countries such as Senegal, India, Morocco, Mexico, Singapore and parts of America, and there are now over 250 respective peer reviewed articles that proves their efficacy for early treatment in the case of HQC and even during the late stages in the case of Ivermectin. The obvious reason why they are not brought to market had nothing to do with the flawed randomized controlled trial argument (a tactic taken from big tabaco), but rather that they pose a threat to the vaccine’s emergency authorization status and the expensive cost of the now proven ineffective remdesivir drug. Fortunately, the South African courts have intervened despite the whimpering objections from SAHPRA and patients can now ask for this treatment from our doctors.
From the very minute that the pandemic struck, we were told to wait for a Covid-19 vaccine as the only means to rescue us from the new black death, but as time went on, we realized that Covid-19’s infection fatality rate is probably not serious for anyone under 65 years of old.
The endless publicity that big pharma obviously paid for is nothing more than a propaganda campaign aimed at scaring a public into vaccine passport submission – an effective revival of the Apartheid Dompas by the technocratic overlords.
Let’s resist this Covid scientism, because it is on course to be the crime of the century.