Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 29

[ecosophia]

The semi-open posts  I've hosted here on the Covid-19 narrative, the inadequately tested experimental drugs for it, and the whole cascading mess surrounding them have continued to field a very high number of comments -- to understate the matter considerably! -- so I'm opening yet another space for discussion. The rules are the same as before: 

1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.

2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here. 
 
3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue. 

4. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules. 

With that said, as Canadian officials launch a campaign of reprisals against citizens who supported a peaceful protest against government policy, and the words "died suddenly" become the favorite media euphemism of our time, the floor is open for discussion.   

Comments

Re: A weird change in the narrative

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, they've been scenario planning in earnest for about 20 years. It started more or less in conjunction with the anthrax events in the US in the midst of the wmd debacle. Going back to read through the write ups that followed each 5 year scenario planning session, they started fairly loose. As they approach 2019, they sure do feel like they tighten into the shape of what we've now lived through. This last writeup, it's not an exact set of steps, a step 1-20 baking recipe, for sure. But you don't really have to squint your eyes very hard at all to see 2019-present waving at you from out of those pages. The names are fiction, the nitty gritty specifics don't match, but the major story beats are there, and quite a few of the minor ones as well. For me, it's way past a list of generic things a society should do in a pandemic, things to bear in mind, should a pandemic come along. It's way too close an overlap to lived experience in my mind to dismiss.

Re: A weird change in the narrative

[(Anonymous)]

Except it's not supposed to be generic list. It's meant to be a scenario, which means they want to imagine what could happen. I didn't dismiss it: I read it carefully and concluded that any pandemic scenario would include most of the same details. People who are only mildly sick assuming they have the flu, not getting tested, and inflating the CFR, well of course this would happen if it's a coronavirus, because they are hard to distinguish from the flu; a hastily approved EUA drug having nasty side effects and probably not working at all, again, this is easy to predict because drugs which get full approval are found to be dangerous and not work regularly; people opposing the vaccines, once more, it's easy to predict.

My point is that the outline matches reality because it is designed to match what would happen in the event of an epidemic. It's missing the vaccine passes, lockdowns, etc, so most of what actually matters about the response since 2020 is nowhere to be found in that report.