Mouth masks off. Now the eye masks.

Compliant sheep have the illusion that "easing" can now take place because we have gotten the bug down. How naive! It remains to be seen whether they want to get rid of 'the' virus in The Hague. The pressure has to stay on. And so the story now is that we need to prepare for another pandemic.

The Dutch Safety Board (OVV) also already sees new pandemics on the horizon and wants to give the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport more powers during a subsequent crisis. Instead of urging The Hague to put its neglected health care system in order, it advises keeping the 'toolbox', the burglar's arsenal with which infringement of our fundamental rights is possible, filled and thus making the constitutionally violating powers permanent. The mouth masks may come off for a while. But the blinders remain on. People still believe the rambling story that the measures got us out of "the pandemic. They still look away from the damage that has been done. People still swear by the risky injections and do not ask the key question: Would it not have been better to choose a different strategy? The OVV report does not ask this fundamental question either. It assumes that the approach was correct. Only the execution could have been better. But if we do not ask that question, we will be back in the same boat before we know it. Worse still, the health dictatorship will become permanent, including constant fear of what has or could happen. Fear, which gives governments (again) the opportunity to steal our rights with impunity.

In 2020, even after a fierce fear campaign, things went wrong. Suddenly natural immunity was taboo. Anyone who talked about it was immediately labeled a mass murderer. One of the most well-known, well-documented and proven scientific truths about cell biology was ignored overnight. The WHO changed the definition of herd immunity to exclude natural exposure to the virus and acquisition of natural immunity. Now, not only does natural immunity appear to exist, but even "expert" Bill Gates has to admit that natural immunity has had more effect than the "vaccines.

Yet the WHO and the National Institutes of Health pretended to have scientific consensus for their unsubtle one-size-fits-all approach to Chinese flu. An approach that resulted in far-reaching restrictions on the population in most Western societies. There was no such so-called consensus. There was only the official story, which for some reason no one was allowed to question. Some think that ignoring the phenomenon of herd immunity is a case of "lost knowledge": a known truth suddenly gets lost for no apparent reason. However, it is more likely that what we know about herd immunity (Rutte also talked about it briefly) was superseded by fear-mongering with manipulated computer models. Then everyone had to and would believe in the panacea that was given the misleading name of vaccination. This was not lost knowledge, but a deliberate strategy. Anyone who does not suspect any driving forces behind this is naive and blind at the same time.

The inherited wisdom of the past was exchanged for a pre-modern 'run-and-hide' theory of disease avoidance combined with the foolish ambition to defeat 'the virus'. The world turned into a madhouse with silly masks and ridiculous, unworkable tactics to pretend we can track and isolate everyone. With vaccination push and coercion, with a health pass with a code that adds nothing, but creates discrimination, exclusion and unprecedented violent repression of free speech.


There were dissenting voices. In October 2020, the Great Barrington Declaration appeared, calling for a nuanced approach that balances risks and benefits of achieving group immunity by allowing those at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally, and protecting the vulnerable to the maximum. Nothing new. Just a basic public health principle that has been around for a long time: build immunity to the virus through natural infection. In following conventional public health science, it would have been deemed unnecessary and potentially harmful to close schools and small businesses, force masks on the general public, and quarantine healthy people. The intent of the Declaration was to let the public know that their intuition was correct, that the restrictions, contrary to what was suggested, were not based on public health science, and that those who opposed them were standing on solid scientific ground. The fact that thousands of politicians, scientists and doctors also signed showed that this so-called consensus was not so bad.

There was no fundamental criticism of the Declaration. People did come up with lies about the document and then attacked their own lies. The scientists behind the Declaration were slandered and dismissed as charlatans, despite the fact that they were highly qualified and had won their spurs. The media obediently joined in. And of course, the authors of the statement were removed from social media, a modern form of the classic book burning. "We follow the science," it was called ("the science is settled". But science is not truth. It is search for truth. Real scientists know that there must always be room for doubt. That the debate should never be silenced. And neither should the debater.

Eyewitnesses, on the authority of the media, still go along with the accursed consensus narrative. After all, the most votes count? Yes, but not in science. And who am I to doubt "the" science? Well, you're the citizen who had to deal with humiliating lockdowns, curfews, entry passes, travel passes, testing and gagging, incarceration and exclusion and, not to mention, unreliable injections. And all because of a consensus that is there only to suppress that dissent. You are paying the bill, just as you now have to pay that skyrocketing gas bill because of that other consensus narrative about global warming. You are also the citizen who is perpetuating the system that will crush you and everyone else by keeping your blinders on.

https://ejbron.wordpress.com/2....022/02/23/mondmasker