Secrets do exist.
At the beginning of 1991, occurred one of the events that would serve as a trigger to open my eyes a short time later. I was just over 8 years old. An older brother was watching TV and suddenly raised all four limbs and shouted "War broke out!" The next thing I remember is watching the screen. In my naivety, I expected to see scenes like in a war movie, but the live broadcast from Iraq consisted only of a static shot of a panorama, lit with green light and with dozens of projectiles ascending as in a mediocre fireworks show. “It seems like December 31 at midnight,” another brother commented.
It could take years for me to know what was happening: Iraq's anti-aircraft fire batteries were insane, because bombs were falling and destroying their targets, but they still did not see a single enemy aircraft on their radars. Why? Because Americans were using the F-117 aircraft, which had the virtue of being invisible (to radars). Aircraft that obviously, by 1991, were still a top secret weapon. For this reason, from the ground they fired with no control at all, and consequently, the 'spectacle' of erratic surface-to-air missiles.
For me, that was one of the most important episodes in the maturation of my way of seeing life. So secrets did exist, and us, as ordinary citizens, are limited to living by that the media tells us, especially TV. If there was an invisible plane destroying targets in Iraq in 1991, only a handful of people knew about it all over the planet, and the secret was used as a weapon that unleashed drastic changes in history... What more secrets will there be today? What other technological and scientific advances are there now, and specially, how will they be used? Why believe that what we know about the world by Stream media, is all the truth? You, dear reader, must know many more examples of historical secrets than I do. I invite you now to wonder how absurd this secret could have sounded before it was officially revealed. After being revealed, it is more than obvious: It is official, it is an indisputable fact. Fission of atoms to cause the greatest destruction imaginable? We all know today that it is. But imagine telling a citizen of the time in such a thing was a secret. Same with the F-117 plane. An airplane invisible to radar? Today: is obvious, you can number several. But in 1991?
Any good reason to believe MainStream?
Why does it continue to sound so profane that, with vaccination, they have objectives that we do not know? Why are the intentions of organizations, governments and media networks still sacred to a huge portion of the public? (Sacred: Indubitable, unquestionable, blameless, unconditionally respectable and with punishments for those who desecrate it.)
What if in 20 or 10 years, what they really did to us through vaccines comes to light? For us the very idea is crazy and offensive. Just like the idea of an invisible plane before the 90’s. Later, when the secret is revealed, there is only the option to accept reality, when the weapon has already been used. But before that happens, we have to settle for what the TV says.
Television and other Stream media blatantly take advantage of the public's ignorance. Unfortunately, much of what is told (outside of TV) about vaccines is perfectly possible and even true and verifiable. But TV filters the information and selects the data to show. Search engines do too. They monopolize perception. This same article can be considered as an attack on security, within a state conceived by the same media, to protect it self.
Has no one of you ever wondered why, suddenly with the 'pandemic', organizations, the media and governments are so desperately concerned with saving the population? Haven't people died of poverty, war and cancer for as long as we can remember? And other evils that have plagued and threatened human civilization have been vehemently ignored: Genetically Modified Organisms (it is no coincidence that I mention it), radiation from mobile phone masts, water pollution from industries, fracking, etc. But while those misfortunes were happening, TV didn't give a damn and presented reality shows, soccer and promoted cell phones and banks. If the TV and the Stream media in general had decent intentions towards the public, they would have always shown an interest in their 'safety', as they do with pandemics. As well as TV and radio repeat three times per minute something related to pandemics, imagine them years ago repeating three times per minute: Don’t use the cellphone, its radiation affects neurons. Do not eat synthetic foods, they wear down the body and mind. Don't watch so much TV and rather read books. Don't go into debt, the banks just want to get hold of you. But it never said such a thing, right? Why is it? And why suddenly, since 2020, TV (and governments and organizations) has become humanity's only hope? Why would it want to protect the public and provide complete and truthful information? They are the only ones who qualify as trustworthy and true what they say.
The basis of the training of a dog consists of the reward for the behavior desired by the trainer, and the punishment for the undesired behavior. For fear of punishment, the dog will adopt exclusively the desired behavior. A limit can be set for the animal, and it will not be exceeded under any circumstances.
The TV says: "The infected do not fit in hospitals, everybody go home." And then it says: "There are already a couple of free beds, everybody go out." Over time, it no longer need any justification to enter and exit lock down. It will be enough for governments to say "everybody stay at home" and "everybody out", as in the game "Simon Says", because the public is trained, like a dog.
Obedience obtained from the population through fear can make people go to live underground without question, accept without delay that the sun gets blocked, forbid them to open the windows, regulate their water, food and reproduction. Furthermore, obedience can make a well-trained citizen the policeman of those who are not obedient.
How the Stream defends itself.
Suppose an article like this is successful in spreading. The next thing you will see is a traditional media campaign, generating a role model that the public should adhere to, and an anti-role model that people should fear to resemble. There will be public figures, artists and TV stars influencing with messages in which they declare themselves against the alleged misinformation, and thus, followers of the stream. It will use slogans and hashtags. There will also be institutional propaganda showing fictitious characters, who receive rewards for being followers of the stream and, in contrast, how ridiculous, dangerous and silly it is not to be a follower of the stream and believe the 'hoaxes' from other sources. And these commercials will be repeated a hundred times a day. Radio hosts and TV presenters will constantly refer to that newly invented model, as they do with brands that pay for advertising.
In this way, the television tantrums when it sees that its domain is in danger. Seeing that people put their eyes elsewhere. Why such a thing happens? Logically because people are, in effect, turning their eyes elsewhere. People are waking up, but that is a phenomenon that the main-stream will always deny.
What TV will never tell you
The development of vaccines is a fascinating episode in the history of science. I used that story with my students to explain how scientific thinking works. The manifestation of a phenomenon, the establishment of a problem, the observation, the hypotheses, the experiments, the results, the conclusions, the establishment of a theory and the application of the knowledge acquired for the benefit of human beings. I will not repeat my classes in this article, but I invite you to search for yourself, although I urge you not to search the internet, but rather in books, printed before the 'pandemic'. And if you're going to use the internet, at least don't use Google. There you will find only lies or at most, truths castrated for you to believe a specific narrative (the same as the stream).
For example, the definition of Herd Immunity and PCR¹, and historical epidemic statistics were modified to fit the official history of the 2020 pandemic.
¹Please read the addendum, writen on 8th April 2021
It is a strategy they have followed to create monsters many times. And that, the public, that unconsciously makes sacred the stream, does not question, only obeys. Rather, the Public questions and condemns those who doubt, as in any religion. Quality concept in industrial education was modified as well in XXI century, to introduce the programmed obsolescence. Another example is that they did not use the term "Global Warming" again, since as a public enemy to create fear, it would not work anymore, due to the lack of evidence of the alleged warming. So they changed the term to "Climate Change", which encompasses all natural phenomena, even those that oppose the idea of alleged warming. A piece of cake, especially with an audience trained to obey.
The same thing happened to vaccines as, for example, to newborn technology that promised to become mass media. The State or large organizations appropriated this knowledge. And they used their power to adjust and / or create laws that granted those organizations the exclusive right and power of its use. Why? Because, while science did see in knowledge the solution to a problem and a service to humanity, the State and organizations did see POWER. That is why it is illegal to transmit radio or TV without permission from the State. And that's why the main-stream today, tries so hard to discredit any information that does not come from itself. For that reason, for the preservation of power, there are companies that patent the genes of all the plant species in the world, and the day will come when you will not be able to have a Eucalyptus tree in your yard without applying for a permit. (Sounds too fantastic? Are you getting annoyed and want to turn on the TV, because you feel safer there?)
For that reason, vaccines are the most profitable business in history and even more so, the most effective control mechanism. Bill Gates himself declares so (search!) And he is not a doctor or scientist. And he is not a prophet or clairvoyant, but he warns that there will be more pandemics.
As in "This is how Television manipulates you", I don't ask the reader to believe anything. I am not TV to force you to believe me. But I do invite you to confront everything I say. But, please, do not use Google to search, or watch documentaries on YouTube, or wait to see what they say about it on the news.
Addendum (8th April 2021)
The following excerpt comes from the Spanish version of this article, in which a user made a clearance of what I found in Google about PCR in April 2020, and leaded to make me think it was a definition change. I jumped to conclusions, mea culpa. Nevertheless, this makes me not change my mind about the media and its lies:
Another strategy —typical but ironically unknown— of manipulating public opinion, is the breaking of controversies. I detected it when I used to listen a lot to radio several years ago. On shows where listeners call in to comment on air, there is always someone attentive to whether listeners say something out of the ordinary on any sacred mainstream story. In case a listener says something on the air that can make the audience think in a different direction than the main-stream needs, this person will pretend to be a listener, and immediately after the controversial statement made by the original listener, he will say something opposite that diminishes the mood of people.
For example, when telenovelas glorifying drug dealers and whores were in fashion in my country, people were sick, tired, bored of it. But, TV knows that—what it does not say does not exist, so it would never, ever say anything about how desperate people were for such soap operas. On the contrary, it 'created' a reality in which people were happy with them, in opinion shows, commercials, etc. And if some little part of reality, no matter how small, leaks into the media, there is always a strategy ready to neutralize it.
Once, to a radio program called a listener and said he was tired of the national TV production celebrating the worst criminals. His call ended, and 'coincidentally', the next call was from someone, very skilled to speak, who practically said: "But, then, how can ‘gringos’ make movies about The Godfather?"
Professional journalists that I knew confessed to me that calls made to television programs generally come from the same studio and those from radio are filtered through a quick interview before going on the air. So how much would cost to producers to have someone ready all the time to 'kill' the controversy in case some smart listener managed to sneak in and say something anti-mainstream? A: Nothing.
They do it whenever something is leaked against or in favor of such a public figure, to direct the opinion of the audience, which always, unfortunately, stays with the last thing they hear. If someone filters in, and says 'black', a clever 'controversy killer' will immediately say 'white', and the 'white' will remain in people's heads.
This is what the first commenter on that article (the sapnish version) is trying to do. Act as a 'controversy killer' and maintain the status qvo of the official narrative. It does the same as the media, in various ways. See what he says about ‘orphan diseases’? The media monsters the normal and normalize the monstrous.
On the other hand, saying that the giant magnate who leads the vaccination are concerned about saving us because we are their workers ... I don't know if he is that naive or if he thinks those who read are that naive.
Look for non-mainstream information about Bill Gates and the polio vaccines he put in Africa. And what he himself declares about the depopulation of the world, agenda 21, event 201 ... read about Elon Musk and the 5G network effects (they never mention that on TV).
Or, that the academics who argue the ineffectiveness of the mask, how unnecessary isolation is, or how definitions have been changed to make them fit the narrative; they're banned everywhere, and he states that it is because the virus is new and we are constantly learning from it.
On the other hand, what I found from PCR in April 2020 is in fact what he says, and I hope that you, readers, take the clarification into account. However, I can’t still be fooled.
I no longer believe even the doctors, who are the first beneficiaries of the crisis. In April 2020 the networks were flooded with videos of policemen and nurses doing choreography because they WERE MAKING FUN AT US. The media have always treated law enforcement officers as heroes, and now health workers. They try (and manage to) to maintain status quo by promoting public blame. Did a policeman die? He is a hero, he died FOR YOU. Does a doctor have COVID-19? He's a hero, HE DIED FOR YOU. Did a hundred policemen die, a hundred health workers? "It's your fault".
Now think, if this language and this message is not perfectly classifiable as despicable, offensive and its author, a terrorist. That is because there is a univocal discourse to follow, which is sacred, and freedom of expression DOES NOT EXIST.
Now: There is no fear of vaccines. Those of us who are against vaccination, we are because WE ARE NOT AFRAID. And not being afraid is a characteristic that makes a person a DANGER FOR STATUS QVO.
And the other question from the commenter: How could they control us with vaccines? A: (disowing with my hand on my forehead): ARE YOU SERIOUS? Only a person who has watched TV all his life and has never read a book, can assimilate that question. It is a controversy that is not easy to kill.
In particular, my country has one of the lowest educational levels in the world, and if here a group of policemen are dragging someone away for not wearing a mask, the rest of the people applaud because they believe that the police are fighting for their safety. But that's not everywhere. In Spain, a crowd prevented the police from arresting a woman who removed her mask. People is awakening, and that is precisely what the system is most concerned about.
But no, how could they control us with a pandemic and the vaccines created to supposedly fight it? How, by God, who can fit that in the head?
Note: since psychopaths are unable to understand sarcasm, and in case anyone is reading, I will tell you that those last questions are pure sarcasm.
Before they banned me from all social networks (why was it?), Users, whether they were controversy killers or deceived and worried people, told me "but, my mother died of COVID-19, my brother is infected and my neighbor too! " I have not claimed that people are not getting sick. In front of my house there are also patients labeled with this disease (and thay're having a bad time). But what if it's something else? Why is it so profane to believe that they are fooling us? Everything has the characteristics of a religion, where the devil is a virus, hell is a disease, the savior is a tycoon and psychopath, the gospel is the official narrative and the prophets, the media. Since I'm not a believer, they might catch me and make it public that I have COVID-19 (of course, I went to hell). They have even done it with presidents (and for the opposite: "That he went to heaven" because he tested positive for COVID-19 but he is not having a bad time because he was vaccinated). It is pure propaganda.
On the contrary, what you see, first in Internet and your neighborhood, but after Internet was purged, only in your neighborhood; were stories of patients who were taken to hospitals by any kind of emergency and they were labeled with COVID-19. Myself, known the stories by my own, of a little girl who was taken to hospital by her mother because she ate a coin. The doctors told her they could receive the emergency only if the girl was labeled with COVID-19. She broke the emergency reception windows, in anger. But those stories are not available in mainstream-media. Other woman told me, his father was taken to hospital because he fell and broke his head. But he was labeled with COVID-19 and abandonned in one of the hospital's corridors, until she threathened the manager with a law suit. In other story, dead people by a car accident were tagged as a COVID-19 victims. Also, a woman (in front of my eyes) were bleeding because of an accidental cut with a knife, but she refused to go the hospital, afraid of being labeled with COVID-19.
A controversy-killer could give this phenomenon a name, and normalize it. Examples of that are the terms "friendly fire", "Collateral damage" and other. "Orphan diseases" is a good one. Give to a monster a name and make it something normal.
But there are, and there will be more people who is not easy fooled.
Спасибо за чтение!