by Steve Cook
This appeared yesterday as part of the propaganda drive to sell a new variant to be scared about in the hope of herding a public generally sick of the whole thing to queue up for the so-called “booster”, which in essence means a third dose of the experimental jab masquerading as a vaccine with the worst safety and efficacy record in history.
One wonders how many people have to be maimed or killed by the experimental jabs before the deadbeats running HMG cease and desist with their attack on the nation. Unfortunately one gets the impression the number targeted for eugenicide is high.
Personally I’d rather take my chances with Omicron – if I’m not actually, like millions of others, already immune. And indeed if it even exists at all! I’m giving its actual existence as a “thing” and not just smoke and mirrors the benefit of the doubt for the sake of argument.
In keeping with the known pattern by which viruses routinely mutate in the direction of being more infectious but less severe, the latest variant to be trotted out seems even milder than its predecessors, which were nothing to be alarmed about for the vast majority of us.
It is also as treatable as its predecessors with Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine and so forth.
The Mail headline (pictured right) raises some interesting questions, some of which were first raised by my son Liam.
1. If it’s so new – why does that graph stem back to July?
2. Why when ever there’s a “new variant” and even when “Covid” first came to the country – do the cases never seem to break out in one location?
Surely you would see a cluster as it spreads from person to person. Like: Mr Smith got it, then his brother, then his brother’s colleague, and you’d see an actual outbreak from where it starts and clusters as people infect those close to them.
But, noticeably, it’s never like that. It’s always “there’s a case in Nottingham, then Essex, then Scotland, then Cornwall.”
How does it skip about the country and appear in random places but not in the contacts of the original cases?
3. It says, ” the majority of the 75 cases were in the fully vaxed”. Which of course is an admission that the so-called vaccines don’t do the job we were promised they would do and are hardly worth the risk of the deaths and adverse reactions associated with them: the experimental jabs are evidently now killing more people than the very treatable bug they are failing to protect us from.
Indeed, as predicted by many experts, the jabs seem to be causing more severe Covid-like symptoms, which the government is making an underhand yet transparent effort to blame on the “new scary variant”.
4. By “fully vaccinated”, I assume that means the three jabs.
How many jabs had the other cases had? One? Two? Were there any cases that had not been jabbed?
5. Omicron is called in the article a “super” variant. What the hell does that mean? In what way is it “super” and not just a variant, which is routine for viruses or is this just journalistic – or propaganda – hype? The choice of words, especially emotional trigger words (“threat”, “deaths”, “cases”, “hospitalisation”etc) is always worth keep an eye on.
Weren’t the Indian, Delta, Kent etc variants similarly hyped up? And what happened to them. Have they quit because they can’t get enough media attention?
6. How severe were the cases mentioned in the article? Were the “cases” “diagnosed” on the basis of the PCR test, the continued use of which is a criminal fraud on the part of those responsible? Apparently the answer to that is “yes”, which makes the figures touted completely unreliable.
7. What about deaths? Not many according to the article, even using the government’s notoriously inflated figures and its well-known tricks for blaming deaths on “Covid”.
8. And we have the “hospitalisations” stat which creates an image of people being rushed to hospital “suffering from Omicron”. But that figure includes many, if not all, “cases” who were already in hospital being treated for something else, were given a dodgy PCR test and got a “positive” and were at that point counted as a Covid admission as the stat fiddling and falsification rolls on.
9. That they are still using the PCR test to diagnose cases when it is known full well the test cannot be used as a diagnostic tool, beggars belief.
That fraud, too, rolls on.
These things tend to happen when you let crooks run your government.
Humanity versus inhumanity, good versus evil Superb Video briefing by Renier Fullmich
The People’s Media
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.