LOCKDOWN sceptics have clearly been the only ones capable of critical thinking throughout the entire Covid debacle. Most realised from the outset that attempting to stop a virus was akin to trying to catch mist in a butterfly net. Lockdown zealots were so arrogant that they presumed man could overcome nature and prevent a process, the spread of a virus, which has been taking place on the planet since before humans set foot on it.
Sceptics could tell from the outset that the extreme tales of doom were just fearmongering by the press. Who, with a modicum of grey matter, would believe the lurid tales of people in China dropping dead on the street? Respiratory illnesses are not like ingesting cyanide. You are not perfectly healthy one minute and dead the next. The stories were patently ludicrous. The fact that the UK government had removed Covid from the list of High Consequence Infectious Diseases just days before announcing the lockdown alerted those of us who don’t regard the BBC as the fount of all wisdom that everything was not what it seemed.
As the charade progressed, it became obvious that the disease, if it existed at all, was nothing more than flu. From the fact that anyone dying from whatever cause within 28 days of a positive test being designated a Covid death to the useless PCR test with its false positives and its cycle thresholds that were far too high, it was only the brainwashed BBC-watchers who believed any of the nonsense.
However, it also became clear that it wasn’t just the mainstream media-watchers who were being fooled. It was the mainstream lockdown sceptics as well. Early on, it was obvious there were different factions within the sceptics’ side. There were the traditional thinkers who knew Covid was exaggerated and BBC couldn’t be trusted but still believed in the establishment and politics, and thought that the government had simply made a genuine mistake in locking down the country and now couldn’t backtrack. Then there were the ‘conspiracy theorists’ who knew the Covid agenda was far more sinister.
The differences were evident when the first public protests were organised by Piers Corbyn. The mainstream lockdown sceptics shunned them because they were appalled at the thought of being seen with the anti-5G and anti-vaxxer ‘nutters’. It never occurred to them that they were acting in the very same manner as the establishment who had referred to all lockdown sceptics as ‘nutters’. They considered themselves the intelligentsia of the sceptics, incredulous that anyone believed the official narrative that lockdowns worked yet, ironically, totally swallowing the establishment view that any of those who believed that 5G or vaccines might be dangerous were mentally deranged, without even investigating their claims. They also ignored the fact that a lot of the ‘conspiracy theorists’ had actually predicted such an Orwellian future many years ago whereas they, assuming themselves to be intellectually superior, would previously have found ludicrous the suggestion that such draconian restrictions and assaults on our liberty would be introduced. It was clear that their traditional views prevented them from really seeing the bigger picture.
Vaccines, though, highlighted the real divisions. Initially, everyone believed that a vaccine would be years away and so the mainstream sceptics, in their eagerness to get out of lockdown, quite rightly said Covid wasn’t dangerous enough to require one and left it at that. The conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, were well aware that Covid was a scam and that we were being led towards some sort of mandatory or semi-mandatory vaccines and a total surveillance state. They saw the true picture and tried to make people aware of what was coming.
Now, a lot of the mainstream sceptics have become victim of the government narrative by their inability to see what’s truly going on. When Boris Johnson recently announced it wasn’t the vaccine that was reducing the number of Covid cases, it was the lockdown, they were apoplectic. They were exuberant in their endorsement of the vaccines and how safe and wonderful they were because they naively thought they were their path back to freedom. Some of them were even suggesting that governments which were placing a moratorium on the rollout of the AstraZeneca vaccine were being excessively cautious. The very same people who were condemning the Government for killing the elderly in care homes and forcing people to go untreated because hospitals were closed to all but Covid cases appear to have no regard for the numerous victims being injured and killed by experimental vaccines. It was clear that they wanted lockdowns to end not because they were concerned for the effect they had on the elderly, the lonely, the children or their local shop owners. They wanted them to end so they could go to the pub or restaurant. There is nothing wrong with wanting to end lockdowns to regain your own freedom, of course, but it is the hypocrisy of pretending it is for other people’s benefit that is so galling.
In reality, the reason why Covid ‘cases’ are falling is simply because it is springtime and all respiratory illnesses decline in spring. So whether you believe Covid is real or is just the flu, there is no need for the fallacious argument ‘was it lockdowns or vaccines?’
The sceptics falling for this contrived debate are doing us all a disservice as it will merely perpetuate the Covid myth. Covid doesn’t need lockdowns nor vaccines to control it, it needs an end to the fearmongering hysteria. It needs people to think for themselves and stop watching the news. If everyone turned off their TVs and threw away their newspapers would there even be an epidemic?