Why Every Society Failed The Covid Test

It may only be a footnote now, but an important one: the CDC through apparent incompetence in devising a test, devising testing protocol to be followed by doctors, and scaling test processing to obtain rapid results, delayed significantly the social policy response.

In April or May of 2020 I sent an email to the Wiesbaden Army Garrison Commander Community Suggestion Site. I suggested that the commissary and PX shopping be changed to require people to call in their orders where it would be packed by employees in the store and picked up by the customer at an appointed time in the parking lot.
I did not even recievd a response. Of course the idea was not implemented. The next time that I was in the United States, in 2021 I saw that local grocery stores had implemented my idea on a voluntary basis. So it was a very doable idea.
This told me that the US military did not really take the COVID pandemic seriously.
At the time I really thought that it was a case of Chinese Bio warfare. But then I noticed so many things are not adding up. We had what were called lock downs in Germany. But Grocery Stores were excluded. Shit if everyone is still going to same grocery store that they have always gone to the lock down is actually a joke.
These things that do not add up are called Red Flags. When it comes to the Corona Virus Narrative there are more red flags than flew in Moscow in 1978.
It ooes not do any good to say go back and read all of these aritcles that I or anyone else has written about COVID-CORONA. That is like a Baptist try to convince an atheist that he should accpet Jesus Christ as his savior by going back and rereading the Bible,
Those hyping the danger of COVID-CORONA throw all kinds of statistics at us that we are not capable or verifying for ourselves. Be we are capable of doing sample probes of our own environment. I have done that with Grocery Stores cashiers in my area. I have not come across a case yet of a grocery store cashier that I know who has been unable to return to work due to Covid. If Covid were a real big problem I would think that people who worked in grocery stores would have been so massively affected that the food retail system should have broken down. It did not even suffer a hiccup.
For this and many other reasons I strongly suspect that when it comes to COVID-CORONA the masses are being conned.

Those problems require us to reduce our consumption significantly (possible to do without large hits to standards of living, but that’s another article)

Would love to read that article!

The underlying belief that is the basis of the current global economic political system goes back to Margaret Thatcher and her “There is no alternative”. Currently there is an arrogant jet-set hierarchy at the tip of the pyramid that seizes all of the global wealth because it has the money and power to do it. Then, there is the roughly 5% who are facilitators/overseers in business and government that control the upward flow of money to get a cut. At the bottom are roughly 90% who are exploited along with the earth’s resources. Pandemics are profit generators for the pharmaceutical industry and stockholders. Spending public money to protect the lives of the “under people” with working public health systems and safe workplaces and schools is simply nonsensical today.

World War 3 – “The War against the Axis of Resistance” is the same. It is the result of the endless wars using public money to fund war profiteers. As the European and Middle East regional wars continue to escalate, the alternatives; UN Armistices, building DMZs on the Line of Contact, and Peace are never mentioned, discussed or adopted. This would require the re-establishment of good government, secure borders, and the rule of law for all resulting in the end to the current amoral corrupt one. Only a second Reformation will avoid the “end of days” crash of the Western Empire.

I just remembered that about 20 years ago I rad a number of articles here in Germany that claimed that when humans live in to clean of an environment their immune systems get comprimised. Of course I do not have the eductational background to confirm that the claimis true. I also do not know how widespread the belief is among people who do have an educational background relevent to this question. But the claim that living in to clean an environmkent can cause damage to ones health due to a weakened immune system seems plausible to me. Does it seem plausible to any other readers?
When one considers this claim I come to the conclusion that using airfliters and ultra violet light in public buildings let alone all buidings is actually not a very good idea at all.
Here is what the balance sheet for such a proposal actually looks like. Becuaswe we are being systematically lied to on a massive scale we do not really know how bad the Corona Virus is. Becuase we are being systematically lied to we do not know how effective or bad immunizations are.
Mathematically that would be represented as: Unknown X Unknown divided by Unknown.
The same formula also applies to masking. Masking in the short term can not hurt and will probably help to some extent maybe even a large extent.. But in the long term maybe maybe masking can hurt.
In addition to that because we are being systematically lied to making claims about having been right in past about Covid would, except for Covid being an airborne pathogen be a self referential claim. Yes sceintist might be able to do a fully controlled experiment inside of a labratory to prove something about Covid but if the Scientists have been weaoonized by other people we can not say whether or not they are reporting in good faith.
Because the environment has been so fogged up by lies most policy reccomendations concerning public health and covid will be little more than guess work.

I feel sorry for South Korea, because she did everything right in the beginning with masking, restricting crowds and testing, but unfortunately she was unable to get the vaccines developed by the West quickly enough to avoid 30, 000 deaths. Nonetheless, far fewer South Koreans died proportionately than Americans (or even the supposedly more enlightened Canadians and Europeans).

Curt, with your logic we would never have had the Victorian public health revolution which gave us public works to handle water sanitation.

No thanks, but you go right ahead and swim in raw sewage …

Covid denialists gonna covid denialize. . . . .

Jorge’s comment can not be over emphasised enough. It was claimed that many people had the virus and never got symptoms and may people to many days to develope the sympstoms. If that is true it was going to be impossibel to stop the rapid spread to the desease.
There is another thing that I have not been emphasising enough. In 2021 India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh all reported an overall drop in mortality for the year of 2020. This is HUGE. For anyone who claims to be a scientist this alone should throw everythign that has ever been said about Covid 19- Corona- (Sars-2?) in to doubt.
We are expected to believe that there was a h uge increase in mortality in parts of the world yet these relatively underdeveloped coutries were left untouched. Hey, is there anyone left on earth that is trained in science.?? Not only was there no increaase in mortality in this part of the world the mortality levels decreased in all three countries in a pattern that had been consistent over many years.
A devious virus is is let loose on the world no later than October of 2019 it is supposed to have caused havoc around the world. But 25% of the world population is miraculously left untouched for the entire year?? I know what the quick but WRONG answer will be, well these coutries would have had even greater reductions in mortality had it not been for covid. Well that means that narraative would have to explain what positive factors that did not exist before2020 exisited in 2020 to off set the effects of covid.
Now lets say that these coutries showed huge increases in mortality in 2021 or after, which as far as 2021 goes they did not because I already checked. That would not prove jack shit. The figures for 2021 are a smoking gun that in much of the world mortality figures were blatant lies. Stories of overflowing hospitals were blatant fabrications. Oh but I got off track a bit. Even if figures show something terrible happened in these coutries later than 2020 that would only show that the conspiracy that manufactured this crisis for much of the world spread and corrupted the health services in these countries as well. The reason that these countries were not included in the first placee is because the costs of of pulling off the scam in these countries would have been to high due to their large populations.
Now I ask you the reader what do you believe is less likely that the public health officials are incapable of accurately tracking deaths in their countries or that the governments of the west, and China, and Russia, and Iran too could mount a massive campaign to with in their own civil services to distort health reality.
In 2021 or 2022 it might have been hard to wrap your head around the correct answer because the 2nd choice implies the largest conspiracy that has ever existed in world history. But by 2023 it should be obvious as hell that the government civil services have been comprimised if Covid is being allowed to run rampant and governments are claiming that there is no longer a great danger when there actually is that would require a huge level of government malfeasence across the world.
Well if health institutions are grossly corrupt in 2023 why should we believe that they were not grossly corrupt in 2020?
Yes it is possible that it is simply a case that governments no longer wanted to deal with an inconvient problem and they were able to force the their civil servents in to compliance. But admitting that makes it possible to concieve of the idea that government manufactured a problem in 2020 and now that their motives for manufacuring this problem have been met they no longer have a use for it. I myself think that is actually the more likely scenario.

Carborundum,
Bullshit, I may be a ghoul but I know how to read. I checked those figures early in 2021 and early in 2022. I found english language links that suported what I said about the death rates. I can not immediately find them now. But I did quickyl find this German language link that supports what I said for 2020. Doing this search I also found links that contridict my claim. But I did not find those links that contridicited my claim when I searched in previous years. So I made the claim in good faith. I will spend some time looking for the english language links. And if I find them what then? What then we are going to have some authorities claiming one thing and other authorities claming another. That should give us real confidence in the systems that we have to ensure accurate reports right?
Here is the German language link:
https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=26&c=in&l=de

In fact I think that I have written about this in the past here and I may very well have included links then. But if not I am sure that I did include links somewhere.

Ok how about this, the death rate for Argentian during the Corona Virus Pandemic.
How does anyone explain this?
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ARG/argentina/death-rate
i rest my case.

Carborundum,
I disagree with your assessment becasue even though India might be younger on average because it has between 3 and 4 times the population of the United States it would have way more old people. The Corona virus was supposedly way more deadly for old people. And not only that because way more Indians live in crammed slums therefore the desease should have spread to the old more easily. Therefore death rates should have been much higher in India.
More importantly you apparently did not read the link about Argentina. Argentina does not have as large a population as India. But some of the same principles apply.
What is most important is not what the actual death rates are but that the data about death rates can not be trusted. That is amply demonstrated in the link about Argentina. If the death rates can not be trusted then scientific assessments can not be made. Then informed decisions can not be made. Only faith based decisions can be made. Not only can we not trust the data about death rates we can not trust the data about adverse reactions to the immunizations either. We are lost in the darkness because our national institutions have failed not because I, or others sceptical of the Corona Boogyman do not understand how science works. Though yes I will agree that millions of Americans are cluless about how science works.
Finally let me emphasis that I am sceptical about the Corona Boogeyman story. I do not reject it completely. In perhaps more relatable terms I am an agnositic not an atheist. The reported data from Argentina does not prove that Corona is not a problem. It onlyl proves that either Corona is a miracle desease because of the massively dispropotionate effect that it did not have on Argentina. Or that the Argentinian data is complete bullshit. Or that the data from many other countries is complete bullshit. Unless Covid 19 is a miracle deaseas some one is lying to me. That is all that I can say for sure. I do not have the resources to investigate who is lying. It is certianly not sceintific to assume that the Argentinians are lying or incompetent and that everyone else is telling the truth.

Carborundum,
Yes it is embarrasing that I missed that note at the top of page. I went straight to the figures without reading the entire page.

Continued from above:
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/us-death-rate-soared-17-2020-final-cdc-mortality-report-concludes-rcna9527
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db456.htm

https://countryeconomy.com/demography/mortality/italy
https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Society-Environment/Population/Births/Tables/lrbev04.html#242410

I realize that silincing people does not mean that you convinced them. In fact it could mean just the opposite. Therefore I am going to somewhat change the subject. Even if I am wrong about the data showing a suspicious story I think thank that it would be difficult to deny that that we were told that children under 5 are in no danger from the Coronavirus. At least that is what we here in Germany were told. When we were having our lock downs, which excluded grocery stores, children were in the stores unmasked. But this information sent up a huge red flag for me. Wow what a miracle desease. It wreaks havoc those that are so old that they statistically have a high chance of dying anyways while it spares the young. My readings of history over the years told me that in past pandmenics, 1919 flu excepted, the old and the young were disporportionately effected. Now we have a desease that has created a hallaballo at the perfect time and they young are an exception from be affected by it. But wait then it does not end with that. 5 or 6 months latter I was hearing about a NYT article about all of these babies in New York struggling to survive corona virus. At that point it did not matter if the desease effected the young or the not because the public was given both stories and both can not be true.
Then there was the massive amount of differing symptoms that were reported from one case to the other. In the past when people had the mumps or small pox, scarlet fever almost everyone had the same symptoms, outlers were rare not the norm. The story about huge numbers of people getting infected and never showing symptoms is a part of this wierd, perhaps unprecedented phenomenon.
During 2020 I was a regular commentator on the website of Australian economist John Quiggens. I had been for about 2 years. I was raising my suspicions about what we were being told about what was happening, which by the way included the story
we were being told that the virus had an infection radius of 1 and half or 2 meters.
I was being frequently attaacked as being a fringe lunatic but was slowly scoring points with a hostile audiance. OK I admit to say that is not sceintific it is my impression of the responses to my comments that the threat from corona virus is more psycological than real. And that we can not trust what we aare being told because we, (humanity) are clearly being subject to some kind of propoganda campaign that was clearly reminiscent of the lead up to the 2003 Iraq war, though with key differences.
But we do not know who is behind and more importantly we do not know where their capabllities to manipulate perceptions end. That lack of understanding who one can trust is crucial.
I agree that huge numbers of the masses are scienticially illeterate. But that is not the key to understanding the contraversary that the pandemic event has unleashed. The crucial factor in explaining the contravery is the complete breakdown in trust of those authorities who are where declaaring themselves who were put forth by the world’s leadership as experts in this field.
But this is not the end of what for me was crucially relevent information. Sometime in the autumn of 2020 I recieved an email from Proffersor Quiggens. The email informed me that I was being banned from his blog. But here is the kicker for me. He told me that he was banning me from his blog because he knew that I was another frequent commentator on his blog who was the site climate denialist. He was completely wrong about that. So I had to ask myself. Why did he accuse me of such a thing. Did he actually believe it? If so that is a pretty good indication that something must have led him to this erroneous conclusion. Did someone say something to him? Or were my comments to him being distorted so that it appeared that I was writting form a different IP address. But what if he did not really believe it. Would that be an indication that I was not supposed to know the real reason that he was banning me because he or someone else did not want me to know? Or was he trying to give me a clue that he was not allowed to tell me the real reason that I was being banned but that he knew what he was saying was bullshit. Now I understand that this story is not scientically admissable evidence because first of all no one can independtly verify my story. Someone may call Proffessor Higgins but he is most likely to say something along the linies of I was disrupting his blog with both covid and global warming denialism. And I have no way to defend myself from the charge that I was not using another name to post comments on his site. But I know that the story as I have told it is true. Therefore for me that much is scíence. But what is not a science is my interpretation of what this story means, The meaning in my life that I give to this story is not a science it is an art. And since it happened to me no one can second guess me because no one is aware of the circumstances as I am. I did decide that it was neccessary to bring this story up for full disclouser. Some would say that having gone through this expirience gives me a predisposition to faulty thinking on this subject. But I do not think that such a thing can be said sceintifically. Because I could say that this incident gives me a predisposition to correctg thinking on the subject. Drawing conclusions from the event is an art not a science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDfIE9DBD1A

I understand why it would be hard to understand the level od deciet that is going on in this case because it is so massive. But the trends of this corruption have been ongoing got years this fake panic spreading pandemic just brought to new uprecedented levels that is why it is such a big and important story. If you bring down to the individual level, even if the figures are true there was just a very small risk that any individual would die and we shut the economy down for weeks in a fake lockdown. I say fake because grocery stores were obviuosly not included and yet the retail food delivery system did not break down. So the real story is did even one extra person die. Even one. We were told so many lies I say that we can not even trust the official death totals for 2020.
If you want to know how it is that the politicians can suddlenly declare the pandemic over it is becacuse if one million or two million extra people die in one year in the United States no one is going to give a fuck, me included. And you know what if they are told that 2 for 3 or 4 million extra people died and that really did not happen then no is surely going to give a fuck.
The Pnandemic Psy Op has surved it purpose and the politicains have no need of it anymore and they know that there will be no repurcusions for ignoring the story now.
But the story can not peter out to quickly otherwise it will be to obvious that it was jsut a psyop.
A desease even if the figures are real which they probably are not was not deadly enough to take massive emergency measures that were taken. The situation reminds me vey much of the civil wars in Syria and Libya several years ago. There were lots of people in the United States and Europe saying, Oh my god so many poeple are in Libya and Syria are dying we have to take action get involved and put an end to these wars by removing Quaddafi and Assad from power. But the question that could be put to these interventionists is how few people have to die in someone elses civil war before you decide that you should let the combatants there fight it out amoung themselves.
The situation in this case is Ok a million dying form a new desease is to many for you to accept without taking emergency measures that have high costs of their own. But what if it was only half a million. what it would be only 250,000? I am not the slighest bit phased by 10 million let alone 1 million. This is planet earth people die here get over it. I can say that because I am not running to win some sort of popularity contest.
Anyways I have a lot of confidence that the death rate stats are flat out lies.
And also that there would have been more deaths if did not take the measures that we took also can not be scientifically proven because tne only way to sceintifically prove that would be to go back and do it all over again and see if the result is different.
The Pandemic psyop was a continuation of trends that have been underway for decades.

The lack of a stoic balance causes grossly misguided good intentions. W easterners are not only cursed with a tecno optimism world view. They also have the idea that death is some kind of personal failure.

Most people look upon life as some kind of gift. I look upon life as a punishment to be endured. But while I am alive I intend to place a much jhigher priority trying to stop people from dieing due to wars of imperialist aggression. Preventing deaths from natural causes is trivial compared to preventing wars of aggression. And preventing deaths that are only paper deaths is a gross misallocation of scarce resources.

Yes but big fat deal. There are millions of deaths in the United States each year. And a hell of lot more in the entire world. This whole exersice is about framing. The number of deaths in the US per 1000 people was very low. You add 20% to a low number and you still have a low number not enough to justify shutting the economy down. If you add 40% to a small number you still have a small number. That still does not justify disrupting the entire economy. You add 80% to a small number and you still have a small number. You add 120% to a small number and well maybe the number is not so small anymore. Then maybe we can start talking about disrupting the entire economy.
But I do understand the point that when a new deasease finally does break out sceintists will not know for sure how deadly it might be and once they know for sure it will be to late to do much about it.
Which brings up another red flag for me. That is how well calibrated the alledged lethality of the desease was. It was if you believed the story to lethal to ignore but not lethal enough to cause mass panic and the breakdown of society. It was like a desease that was designed by a committee.
Besides that way more people die from prevental natural causes than from wars and murder is not really relevant because natural life itself is 100 lethal. And those who get all hyped about about good nutrition and exercise to encourage people to live a long live are flat out unnatural, or maybe the word synthetic would be more appropriate.
Anyways as I have often written in the past the resources of society and governments are not unlimited. That is one reason why I oppose the US getting involved in foriegn civil wars. With this though in mind, If we took all the money that we spent for pandemic reasons we might have been able to save many more lives than we alledgedly did during the pandemic. But it would be impossible to prove that scientifically unless we could rewind the clock and do it all over again a different way. And that is if the pandemic death figues are even accurate which I highly doubt is the case.

The priority of governments has to be to address injustices. For the United States and the entire collective west that means dealing with their historical legacy of slavery and imperialism.
Life comes with risk. That risk can be increased or decreased depending on what actions one takes. But everyone has their own standard of what is an acceptable risk to them and what level of risk that they think that other people should be wililng to accept. It is easy to understand that there will never be agreement on what that level should be.
Therefore even if and especially if the story of the pandemic was true leaders have to expect that there is going to be a huge amount of disagreement over what steps should or should not be taken under the circumstances.
I would chose a life lasting 60 years loaded with cream puffs over a life of 90 years loaded with Tofu every thyme.

There is still a lot of really important things that need to be brought up reguarding how the COVID-19 Pandemic was covered.
I fam saying that as far as tradgedies go it was a joke tradgedy. Yes you read correctly i sued the word joke in connectionf with the corona virus pandemic. I used tht word not only for shock effect but becuase it is true. Becuase it is all a matter of what you want to compare it against.
If one wants to compare the COVID_19 Pandemic against the Las Vegas Country Music Concert Shooting of a while back one could make the case that the pandemic was a real tradgedy because it is possible that more poeple under 30 died from the pandemic than the shooting.
But when we look at the Pandemic on both an individual level, family level, and society level. We can easily imagine that if you compare what alledgedly happened with what could have happened much much worse things can happen to people, to families, and to societies. Huge numbers of people have forgotten that because due to industrialization and anti biotics these really terrible terrible things have not happened for almost 2 centuries, at least in the collective west.
But some people understand that humanity is now standing on the precipous of extinction. When this event starts to take hold due to the collapse of industrial agriculture which will almost surely take place at some point in the next 25 years, and going out 25 years is an optimistic projection, whole families are going to be murdered and eaten by maurading bands of cannibles. Therefore I am certainly not going to get teary eyed over a few 10 of millions of mostly old people dying of COVID-19.
This is an issue that humans will disagree about that can not be settled by science because one has to compare the effects of COVID_19 doing nothing. with COVID-19 doing something which would include all of the side effects of doing that something, which would include all of the opportunity costs of doing something. This compairson depends upon subjective value judgements that is an area that science can not address. Ok to be clear science can inform us to help us make our value judgments but in the end these judgements come down to human tastes. For example which city has a better local government San Diego or Victoria?
I myself am do not mind living in a world in which the leadership fails as much as it succeeds. But I do not want a world to exist in which the political leadership is not acting in good faith. It is the job of people to try to change it. But if that becomes impossible a world such as that should be destroyed with all possible speed with everyone it in before this virus infects the future. When that would become impossible is of course an estimate that everyone has to make for him or herself.
Now we have reached a point that it is out of human hands anyways.

But we still might have time for revenge.

I commented on this over a week ago. It is absolutely unfathomable to me that someone who writes about power as often and as clear-cut as Ian does would promote lockdowns. Just the name is horrifying: LOCK DOWN. I posed this question, which Ian never answered:

“How do feel about an organization such as the WHO – or any national government, for that matter – having the power to declare wholesale lockdowns of society? Are you in favor of this?”

Actually, I am not surprised Ian didn’t answer it, as it was a stupid question in the first place. It was stupid because obviously Ian wholeheartedly supports locking down human beings – without any caveats whatsoever.

Ian, you sometimes give “the other side” of things and will give some or even much credence to ideas and actions that don’t coincide with your thoughts on the matter. Yet in this instance, you haven’t even said something akin to:

“Look, we need to eliminate this plague and many experts are saying that if we keep people isolated from each other and “track and trace” that we can do just that. However, as one with much expertise on power and how it is wielded, I realize that all manner of foul play is likely to be involved here. I mean, I have been writing about how governments and their respective agencies are no longer in any way accountable to the public; rather, they are beholden to powerful vested interests. As such, I would be remiss in simply endorsing government or government-agency related lockdowns of human beings.”

This is why I wrote this, which I imagine you interpreted as a mean comment, though it wasn’t intended to be:

“It’s an enormous issue, Ian. You can’t just pick and choose what you personally do and do not want to “litigate” after making bold pronouncements in the first place. I mean, you can…but it’s rather childlike and not particularly honest, and it’s seemingly not in keeping with the overall tenor of your blog.

That comment was actually specific to vaccines. I am surprised you’re not upset at the Orwellian changing of the meaning of the word “vaccine” to something the aforementioned vested interests can profit even more from, perpetually.

You stated that “the questions” surrounding these issues are “all wrong” to which I replied:

“The questions are almost all wrong? I believe valid questions are being asked.”

You then responded with a non-specific rejoinder that simply says “I’M RIGHT ABOUT COVID AND LONG COVID BECAUSE I’M ME. Here it is:

“I’m not going to be wrong about the consequences of Covid and Long Covid, it’s exactly the type of problem I get right routinely, but you’re free to not believe that and I don’t care enough if you believe me to jump thru hoops.”

Previously to that, you said this:

“Let me ask you questions which would require hours for you to answer in detail, but require only minutes for me to ask.”

What on earth are you even talking about? Why would it take you hours to answer the most basic questions surrounding the most basic civil liberties? And you know damn well that many of the commenters rightfully concerned with the “vaccines” and the call for lockdowns and tracking and tracing everyone and everything spend hours doing our own research.

Ian, this is a huge blind spot you have. And I hope that’s all it is.