this week in the vaccine wars

Doctor Robert Malone is the inventor of the vaccine technology currently being used to derive the Covid 19 vaccines.

He is an opponent of the present mass vaccination programmes for  the Covid 19 virus for which his technology has been used.

In particular most recently he has noted in the plainest terms that the Pfizer vaccine is harming more people than it can conceivably be claimed to be helping.

This week the Twitter internet corporation banned Doctor Robert Malone from their website where he had a channel with half a million followers.

So the Twitter corporation in their wisdom have decided that the inventor of mRNA vaccine technologies is not qualified to state that the present mass vaccination programme using his technologies is unjustified.

So it goes.

On Wednesday I was kneeling in a church when a woman approached and knelt beside me.

"Can I shake your hand?" she asked.

I indicated that she could.

"I feel so alone," she said. "No one is speaking out against all this."

Today I was in another church.

Another woman approached me.

"Why aren't you wearing a mask?" she asked.

"Let's go outside to talk," I said.

We went outside.

"I'm James," I said trying to humanise things.

"I know you. You gave me a book about Saint Bernadette when I was suffering with depression."

"Oh. Oh. That's right. It's you."

"Will you take a mask? I have two here for you."

She proffered two ruddy great perspex masks, gigantic even by Ireland's ridiculous standards of masks, more like welders' face shields than anything else.

But of course it was not the aesthetic ridiculousness of the welder's face shield style mask that caused me to demur.

"The masks don't work," I told her. "There's just been a formal survey in Denmark. Thousands of people wearing masks. Thousands not wearing them. And no real difference in the infection rate. We need to tell our governments to stop this."

"But would you not wear one just to make people happy?"

"You have a point there. But..."

She started to back away.

"I have to go."

And she was gone.

Like a startled fawn bounding up the mountain path.

I didn't want to offend her or frighten her.

I wanted to respect her viewpoint and express my own reasonably.

I never had time to say: "I'm opposed to the masks on principle. If I wear a mask it might make people think I agree with all this nonsense. Wearing a mask implies we're all supporting our government's forcibly induced hysteria programme. It implies we all accept being forced to use vaccines that don't work either and that are made out of unborn babies murdered by abortion. People need to see that some of us are fighting back against this tyranny."

Nor did I get a chance to say: "You asked me would I not wear a mask to make other people happy. Well it would me very happy if you took your's off and threw it away. So how about it?"

Back home I thought briefly of how the contours of discourse can alter quickly in these narratives.

A rum thought struck me.

The most insidious thing I've noticed over the past two years is not the Twitter/Youtube/Facebook axis manipulating discourse on behalf of an emergent supra national tyranny.

Nor is it pharmaceutical companies having successfully subverted academe through endowments, and then the medical profession itself through bribes, now going on to a systemic subversion of media through advertisting and politicians through yet more bribes.

Tbe most seditious thing I've seen gentle readers, is the insertion of nonsense into the narrative by people pretending to be on my side in opposition to the present societal malfeasance by ye aforementioned pharmaceutical companies and supra national tyrants.

I'm thinking of the so called Doctor Carrie Madej in America falsely claiming to have found artiifcial life forms in the vaccines.

What was she playing at? Clearly she was trying to insert nonsense into our clear minded, wise and principled campaign against abortion tainted vaccines.

But did she do it to terrorise people? Or just to create vexation? Or as I think, to run pass defence for the very pharmaceutical companies she pretends to despise?

Over the past twelve months there were also what I regard as similar attempts to sabotage Nobel Prize winner Doctor Luc Montagnier's scholarly rejection of the current mass vaccination programme.

As soon as he wisely and correctly spoke out against the vaccines, all across the internet unidentifiable sources falsely claimed that Doctor Montagnier had said everyone who took the vaccines would die from them.

I would suggest the false comments attributed to Doctor Montagnier were planted deliberately to discredit and overshadow his real comments to wit: "There is no justification for a mass vaccination programme for Covid 19;" "The virus appears to have been made artificially in a laboratory;" "It looks to me as though they were trying to create a vaccine for Aids."