Note on Self Censorship:
I have been grappling with the ideas I am going to talk about in this Goat Rodeo for a long time. I have been turning them over and over in my head. But I have not had the courage to go public with my line of questioning. Why not? What has kept me from sharing? These are just ideas and questions after all. You can take them or leave them. Well, for one I have seen how sharply criticized those people are who have had the courage to question, to expose ideas to the public that run afoul of what we are being told to think and believe. For the most part I don’t care. But I do care deeply about my family, my friends, my colleagues, and honestly you are my audience for the Goat Rodeo. So I have been imposing a self-censorship on opening up what may be a can of worms. It has been bothering me that I have done this. In so doing I have been dishonest with myself… put a gag on ideas that should and must be brought out into the light and spoken about. Debated. I welcome that. It’s time for the Goat Rodeo to get real.
What if the pandemic started with a leak from a lab? That would mean people were actively involved in developing a virus with artificially created features making it more dangerous to humans. If that is true, as seems to be the prevailing hypothesis now, then one of two things happened. Just two. It escaped accidentally. Or It was released intentionally.
If an accidental leak was the cause of the utter meltdown of free societies and has led to the blindfolded wrecking ball approach to public health that has been imposed upon us… and now, after more than two years the architects of our response have obviously been a failure to control the spread of the disease and have been responsible for untold economic, psychological and physical damage to millions if not billions of people. Those responsible should be identified and held to account. Whoever was working on corona viruses in a lab from which they could accidentally leak should be called out and made to answer for their part in this. Recklessness in a setting where the consequences are this dire really ought to merit a tenacious investigation. If “We’re all in this together”, (remember that slogan?) I would expect a unified voice, rising in pitch and volume demanding an inquiry into the origins of SARS-Cov-2. Wouldn’t you? But I don’t hear that. There was a farcical shim-sham investigation fronted by Peter Daszak over a year ago, but that was shown to be nothing more than a distraction. Why? Maybe we’re not all in it together after all. In fact I can say for sure that an appalling cleft has been riven through the heart of our society and, as a people, we are more distantly divided than at any time I can remember.
Why was Anthony Fauci’s first action to have a secret teleconference with Jeremy Farrar of Britain’s Wellcome Trust and a few other select individuals when on February 1, 2020 a conclusion by Kristian Anderson, and others, that the virus genome was, “Inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory”, suggesting rather that it could have been the product of genetic engineering… of lab origin. They went into damage control mode right from the outset. The decision was made to crush any notion of a lab origin and form a lockstep PR juggernaut with the message that the only scientifically tolerable hypothesis was zoonotic escape.
If Sars-Cov-2 was intentionally loosed on the public we have a much larger problem. Any argument there? The question is: Can we rule this possibility out? Think about that for a moment. I don’t mean simply dismiss the idea out of hand and slam the steel doors shut. Sure the very idea is so disgusting and repugnant to decent human beings that it should be inconceivable. Sadly it is conceivable and in some think tank somewhere it has already been pondered and the pros and cons weighed out and the and the cost vs profitability has been calculated. That is the nature of the work some people do. If you or I or anyone we know can think of it you can bet those dark schemers already have. So I am asking seriously, “Is it possible to say with certainty that the pandemic was not intentionally started?”. Please show me the proof. That’s what I’m asking for here. We need to see solid evidence that can put that concern to rest once and for all. To prove that the pandemic was NOT planned. Don’t just sit back on your comfy couch and say, “Conspiracy Theory”, “Misinformation”. Really confront, even embrace the question: Could this entire Covid worldwide phenomenon have been an orchestrated program? I know you want to say, “No”. So do I. But how can we be sure? Viewing the notion of such utter depravity with revulsion so strong it makes one recoil and abandon that avenue of inquisition is not the same as proof.
If it is true that SARS-COV-2 was developed in the lab AND intentionally released (I’m not saying it was. Just what if) then isn’t it also possible, likely even that those responsible for the development of that virus would have the jump on everyone else in developing and promoting a “Vaccine”? That would seem to be the next logical step if this was planned. What are the implications of this if it’s true? Think of who started promoting the line that this would only end when everyone in the world had been vaccinated. This statement surely started making the rounds long before it would have been scientifically prudent to assume anyone would be able to develop a vaccine. This is especially noteworthy given the fact that no vaccine had ever been successfully developed against a Corona Virus. Ever. But decades of sweat had been spent in that effort. Could the profit motive, or social control motives be strong enough for nefarious actors to pull the trigger on such a scheme?
What if it is true that there have been effective early treatments all along and they were suppressed and prohibited? If that is true (and there is an abundance of evidence to show that it is) then Moderna, Pfizer and J&J would not have been able to get Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) for their Covid “Vaccines”. In order to get that EUA classification there must have been no other effective treatment. Why would anyone suppress life-saving treatment? Especially during a global pandemic. Why were certain medications banned from use for Covid-19 when multiple credible sources from all around the world were reporting and continue to insist that hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of lives could have been saved if these treatments hadn’t been suppressed? Turn that idea over in your head. Why would any person or group do that? (Hint: You will have to think like a psychopath).
What if the “vaccines” were the objective all along. When you take a step back from it all and look at the way the narrative has played out it really looks like getting shots in arms of everyone on earth has been a primary objective since the Covid narrative from the outset. “Wait for the vaccine” implies a certainty it would be able to be mass produced. That would have to be called a Wild Assumption. Then, “Everyone Must Get the vaccine” became a despotic and tyrannical dictate. A dividing line was drawn based on an individual’s personal decision to take the shots or not. Enough people had decided Not to risk taking these inadequately tested experimental genetic products so mandates, shaming, institutionalized and media driven discrimination and segregation followed. Disruption of social networks, loss of friends rifts within families and loss of employment resulted. Isolation was imposed upon people but we humans are social in our deepest nature. Isolation is injurious to a person in very real ways. Prolonged isolation is used as a form of torture.
What if the shots are injuring people? Did the vaccine makers know about it before mass marketing their products? Was there anything in the abbreviated trials that would have shown this? If not, then why did CDC try to hide the trial data for 75 years? Why did health freedom advocates have to sue the government repeatedly in order to have their FOIA requests begrudgingly granted? Why is there such push-back when it comes to looking at the VAERS data, the V-Safe data, the UK Yellow Card data, all the post market surveillance systems that are tasked with monitoring signals of injuries and deaths in temporal proximity to the shots? How is anyone comfortable with over 4,000,000 reports to VAERS of adverse events from these vaccines? How does anyone with a conscience shrug that off?
Imagine if the media was used as a tool to direct and shape the public’s conception, beliefs and fears about Covid-19. It shouldn’t take much imagination, even for the imaginatively impaired among us. What if the New York Times, Washington Post, the Lancet, Nature, CNN MSNBC, FOX, NPR and others all ran similar stories to ramp up fear of Corona Virus Death and direct the public’s attention away from the promise shown by repurposed drugs and quell concerns about the likely lab leak origin? What if those media outlets ran misleading stories about therapies and physicians that were showing success in treating and preventing Covid infection? Would there be a greater probability that such a lockstep trajectory in reporting was co-incidental or co-ordinated? STOP! Really think that one over. Don’t squirm subconsciously because in your own private thoughts you may just have to venture into the realm of “Conspiracy Theory”, because that is the radioactive ground you will have to tread in order to examine all the possibilities of this Pandemic…if you dare .
What if our government health agencies and pharmaceutical and medical oversight agencies were withholding information and therapeutics that could ease suffering and increase understanding of what we’re really up against with Sars-Cov-2? Evidence is emerging that points in that direction. Why would they do that? Why would they insist on a hard sell of experimental vaccines, the likes of which have never before been employed in humans, and ban and censor anything and anyone who voices alternate possibilities, regardless of their credentials or merit? Would that seem like an enlightened approach to easing and ending this worldwide problem? Would that seem scientific? Would not an open forum of wide-ranging ideas create the most verdant environment from which to harvest the most fruitful, best strategies for getting out of this mess? Hasn’t that approach always been shown to produce the freshest and most innovative results? Why is this not happening? Why are censorship, coercion, force and autocratic dictates employed instead? And why is the conversation being throttled down to a narrower and narrower area of acceptability? Any reasonable person should be able to appreciate the need for large, open forums of discussion in order for the world to be able to understand and mitigate the damages of Sars-Cav-2.
There is something dangerous in the air. And it is worse than any virus. It smells of rotting fish and your masks will not protect you from it. Our ability to think for ourselves and freely voice our observations and ideas is in danger. Our own federal government created a Department of Misinformation and has vomited up billions of dollars with the express intention that your tax dollars and mine be weaponized against us in an information war in which only an approved narrative would be permitted and all dissent would be crushed. “Misinformation”, “Disinformation” and “Malinformation” are terms used against us for thinking for ourselves and voicing facts and opinions that are in conflict with the approved story. Thankfully that ill-conceived bureau has been dismantled due to uproarious outcry from the people, who for that moment did find their voices.
In my state of California Governor Newsom has just signed into law AB2098 which is said to be aimed at stopping “Misinformation” being spread by doctors. It sharply limits what doctors can publish, or even say within the confines of their offices to their patients regarding Covid-19 treatments, Public Health Policy and vaccines. Now licensed physicians in the state of California can be sanctioned and even have their licenses to practice medicine suspended if they so much as say something that calls into question the dominant narrative regarding Covid-19 and the “vaccines”. Since the first days of the pandemic there have been highly credentialed and respected doctors, MD’s and Phd’s who have taken a view that is much different than the one dictated by the CDC, FDA and WHO. These institutions have even disagreed among themselves on certain aspects of what constitutes best practices in the care of Patients with Covid-19 and the Public Health measures needed to try to limit its spread. Much of what was “Required” early on has now been rolled back. The mRNA inoculations were at first touted as preventative to CV-19. Rochelle Walensky, Tony Fauci, Joe Biden and their minions in TV newsrooms all stated, If you get vaccinated you will not get Covid-19. You will not spread it to others”. Now they have all had Covid-19 themselves. And almost certainly spread it to others.
What was “Conspiracy Theory” six months or a year ago has now, in many cases held up to scrutiny and proven to be true. The Public Health officers and politicians dictating policy have all had to redefine the playing field repeatedly since early 2020. At what point is what they said and did early on going to saddle them with the moniker of Disinformation Spreader?
What if the vaccines are not really vaccines? This is a view voiced by many well credentialed scientists and doctors. It is well known that the public has a certain level of distrust when it comes to drug makers. The large criminal and civil penalties paid out by big players like Pfizer and Johnson&Johnson are undeniable proof that these corporations operate like well dressed criminal syndicates buying their way into the halls of government minimizing their trouble in the courts. The fines, into the billions of dollars in Pfizer’s case sound astronomical to the average American, but to these fat cat corporations such figures amount to not much more than a slap on the wrist and seem to be considered part of the cost of doing business.
Think about the opioid epidemic, the Vioxx scandal and right now there are a shelf-full of blood pressure medications being recalled and pulled from the market due to cancer causing components in their formulations. We are witnessing an interesting disconnect that happens in the minds of people when the subject of vaccines enters the discussion. People have a strong faith in vaccines and see them as an unmitigated good. Some invisible barrier has been constructed within the psyche of the mass populace and they cannot look at Big Pharma through the lens of its criminal record when examining the subject of vaccines. A strange trance state has been achieved that renders it impossible for the majority of people to look critically at vaccines and dig down underneath the claims that are made about their miraculous history of vanquishing terrible diseases. Neat and handy labels have been drummed into the collective mind like “Conspiracy Theorist” or “Anti-Vaxxer”. These terms have the bizarre strength to be able to shut down inquisitive thought and open dialogue. If the discussion becomes uncomfortable and you have no facts upon which to base a rebuttal just wave one of these slogans and you’ve effectively erected a shield to hide behind and exit the encounter.
At what cost are vaccines given. At what point is there a critical analysis weighing the good against the harm? In March 2019 Dr. Peter Aaby uttered these words, “Most of you think we know what our vaccines are doing – we don’t”. Who is Peter Aaby? He ran the Bandim Health Project in West Africa for almost 40 years. It was a vaccine program for children aged 6 months to 5 years aimed at reducing childhood mortality in Africa. After all that time and with total confidence in the program, he noticed an oddity. The vaccines were given at certain ages and by happenstance there was a sizable group who were not able to make it to the vaccination centers on time so they missed their vaccines. These kids were found to be more susceptible to the target diseases, but they were five times less likely to die from all other causes. Dr Aaby dove into the data and found that the vaccines were responsible for an increase in all cause mortality among the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated.
What if this level of Big Brother authoritarian control was part of the plan all along? What if this Covid is a bioweapon let loose in order to create enough fear and confusion so as to make the People malleable enough to accept societal changes we would never accept under normal circumstances? What if Event 201 really was a blueprint for reshaping the world? That would mean there are people planning and directing this worldwide catastrophe. It would necessarily mean a Deep State or a Shadow Government or an elite class is at the levers of control from behind the occulting cover of a sort of curtain. It would make the word coined early on but fiercely attacked, “Plandemic”, accurate and correct. Would it mean that this Bio-Weapon Virus and the experimental gene therapies are the tools of a New Genocide? I would love to say, “No”, but can I?
What are they doing at Boston University and why? What does it mean that Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer chose not to appear before the European Parliament to answer questions about the Pfizer contracts with the EU? What are the implications of the statement made by his stand in, Janine Small that the vaccines were not tested for their ability to stop transmission of the virus before they were marketed to the general public? Who is to be held responsible for all the hate, discrimination, segregation and damage done by the policies that targeted those who did not trust in the vaccines and who expressed their legitimate concerns about the vast landscape of unknowns relative to the potential short, mid and long-term effects of these experimental products? These are a lot of uncomfortable questions and ideas. I hope this Goat Rodeo will encourage some reflection of where we are and how we got here. The shape of the world has changed so drastically in the past three years and so much of what has been done has made no sense. Unless we are free to ask questions and look at problems from an abundance of angles, unfettered by stigmatization, censorship, shaming and deplatforming we are hobbling ourselves and severely limiting the possibilities for asking and answering such questions and creating a better vision for a brighter future.