Questions and sketchy coincidences continue to surround the outbreak and spread of the COVID-19 Novel Corona Virus.
If this virus and the pummeling 24/7 fear based news cycles aren’t pinging your skeptic sensors yet, then you should probably start taking a deeper look around and break away from whatever other distractions are currently absorbing your attentions.
While only time will tell and reveal more information about what is really going on here, disinformation and media spin continue to abound concerning information about this virus.
In this article today I wanted to take a moment and talk about a little something I ran across on the rock solid website FactCheck.org. Now, when I say rock solid, I hope you pick up on my not so tongue-in-cheek jibe. My fingers literally wished that they could barf just having typed that out, but alas they have no mouths, so, hold it in boys and swallow.
This article titled ‘New Coronavirus Wasn’t Predicted In Simulation’ dated on Jan. 29th, proceeds to set the record “straight” on a popular online “conspiracy theory”, ala a Snopes type flavor.
Now, while the original theory that they are reportedly debunking, did (they say) come from Mr. Alex Jones, the article does little in my opinion to ‘debunk’ much of anything other than some of Mr. Jones’ personal takes.
It should be said from me that I am not the biggest fan of Alex Jones. Personally I think while he stumbles upon a lot of areas that need to be brought more attention on, his unique way of marketing and spinning those items, can do more harm than good sometimes. But, that’s Alex, and he knows how to market his product. Besides, as a free citizen of this country, he is, and should be, entitled to his opinion, and his thoughts as to what those opinions mean. If you could accuse him of anything, it would be that he may pitch his thoughts on what something might mean as what they do mean. And still, that’s fine. It’s up to the people reading to do their due diligence and verify facts, sources, etc., and come up with their own opinions. Just as it is here and everywhere else. Including FactCheck.org.
Let’s do a quick recap here of the subject to give a little background to you, our reader.
Back in October of 2019 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted an Exercise entitled Event 201 that was focused on the nation’s systems of emergency preparedness in the event of a very severe pandemic. In this exercise, the group (in which the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation participated in. Keep that in your back pocket though for the moment) modeled a Pandemic outbreak of a mock Novel Corona Virus and it’s effects. Now, it needs here to be mentioned here that Coronavirus is a name for a group of viruses that have been around a long time. Novel means and indicates a new, or previously unknown variation.
This group studied the effects in which, in the model, a novel strain developed from livestock originating in Brazil, and thusly spread infecting the entire globe. The group occasionally does these types of models every so often, and studies the emergency response.
In Mr. Jones’ article on the story, which FactCheck.org states were picked up by ‘other’ media outlets and spread virally on social media, he states that the model showed 65 million deaths. Mr. Jones’ article goes on further to claim that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which participated in this event, also happens to fund a firm, Pirbright, in the UK, that holds a virus patent and is funding research for a vaccine that helps it to stop spreading.
So, before we go on, let’s just pause here.
So, in October 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security happened to do one of their models. It happened to be a Novel Coronavirus. It happened to start from livestock in a populated socialist country. And, it happened to spread globally. Oh yeah, and a company that is funded by a member commonly referred to in some circles as a member of the global elite, happens to fund another company that happens to be working on Novel Coronaviruses. Got it. No, that’s completely normal and not at all sketchy. Right? Nothing is going on here. All coincidence…maybe. You can be your own judge, but you should read on.
So, the FactCheck.org article goes on about its ‘debunking’ business by setting the record straight in clarifying that 65 million deaths was not reported by them. But it does this by direct quoting a source from the group during a release that it did not make a prediction because they stated during the test that the results were not a prediction. Say what? Yep.
Whatever the causality results were in the test scenario were not a prediction because we said that it would not be a prediction. Which is fine, but, that does not mean it didn’t come up with a number. In fact, the source doesn’t say whether a number was predicted, not predicted, predicted that number, or some other number. It may not have been a data point, but that doesn’t ‘debunk’ there was a number or what the number was. Maybe the number/result doesn’t matter, but if you’re ‘debunking’ falsehoods, you didn’t here. You just did the same thing Alex did. Spinned it a certain way. Presented it in another way. A non-denial denial of sorts.
FactCheck.org also goes on quoting the source and explaining that this wasn’t on COVID-19 and that these types of tests are normal and logical and that it’s further logical that the virus strain be of Coronavirus type.
That’s fine. Mr. Jones’ article, didn’t say different. It may have implied it, perhaps. But that’s not on him. That’s on his readers. If he framed it in that manner, it’s on them to get the info and do with it what they will and think for themselves. Nothing ‘debunked’ here either. Just a different direction of leading the audience. In this case to lead them to think they’ve been fooled and one has nothing to do with the other.
The FactCheck.org article continues in its source’s quotes, this time on the Pirbright connection, explaining that Pirbright sources state they work primarily on animal vaccines and that they do not have a vaccine currently on COVID-19. The mentioned patent number by Mr. Jones refers to an IBV Coronavirus for poultry, in which mutations are developed that weaken the virus, but a vaccine is not available and is being developed. The sources go on to say that they are not currently working on human coronaviruses. However, their source also states that many vaccines including Flu and polio were developed this way and their research is ongoing.
The Pirbright sources in the FactCheck.org article go on to explain while they do receive funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, that they are not currently receiving any funding from them on their patented vaccines.
Ok, so at best here, FactCheck.org may have Alex on the Patent Number he referenced in his article. Or do they? In the InfoWars article, I never read where an actual patent number was referenced. So here FactCheck.org seems to pick out something, anything they can, either from thin air or some other corner of his website (I haven’t scoured it in great detail) so they can say he made a mistake and is spreading non-factual information and this whole thing is crazy garbage.
But. Let’s take another look.
Alex says The Bill and Melinda gates Foundation funds a group who owns a virus patent. Which they do. Mr. Jones never actually says that it’s a COVID-19 Patent. Alex says they are funding research for a vaccine to stop it from spreading. Pirbright’s own source in the FactCheck.org article says many vaccines are developed in this manner and there is research that is continuing. Is it for human coronavirus or COVID-19? The source doesn’t say it is or it isn’t. The source does say it isn’t currently working on human coronaviruses, but not that it hasn’t, doesn’t, or won’t be. And, as far as funding, the source says that they are not currently receiving funding on their patented vaccines……so, why would they? Those are done and should be generating their own revenue types for their further research, if needed.
Not to mention the majority of the article on InfoWars isn’t even about this or making absurd connection claims in the way this FactCheck.org article would have you believe they are. Makes me wonder how many everyday FactCheck.org readers would be reading InfoWars articles anyways to see from themselves what was claimed.
Is Mr. Jones’ article misleading? I would say yes, but that’s not my point here. I’ve established that Mr. Jones will position his messages in certain ways for his business models. At least his headlines. Then what is your point you may ask?
It’s this. That in this case at least, I’ve shown that FactCheck.org does the same thing. It never really debunked anything here. It did, however, present an angle and frame the narrative. The author of this article clearly shows their bias against Mr. Jones and ‘Conspiracy Theorists’, and tries its best to ‘debunk’ and disprove and shut down this narrative. It was not objectionable, though it tried to present itself as such, within their ‘rules’.
Now, the point of this isn’t to try to protect, defend, or endorse Alex Jones. But I will fight for his right and his freedom to do what he does. I also personally don’t think he should be attacked for it either.
One has to ask themselves why there seems to be a malice tone towards ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ in this article and in general. This is cancel culture. This is the shadow banners. It is clear as day. So we look deeper into where this comes from in this one case, and we see more revealed once we learn who FactCheck.org is partnered with – Facebook. Where are we seeing the cancel culture explode? Social media. Mr. Jones knows this, as he was banned and kicked off of virtually every social media platform, from YouTube to Twitter, to Google…and Facebook. It’s a continuation of an ongoing hit job, just better dressed.
That shouldn’t happen in America, where free speech is supposedly the law of the land. I am troubled when we have organizations that tell us, “No, no, that’s not true. Here’s the truth!” and I’m troubled by a portion of the populace that feels like it needs something to tell them the truth, but doesn’t have any urge to do the work to find out themselves.
While COVID-19 continues to have strange coincidences surrounding every facet of it, it is very important that every American hones their critical thinking skills and asks questions for themselves. That they continue to look at what’s happening and where there’s something funny looking going on, that they look deeper and do their diligence in finding out all that they can. Personally, I say people should be wary of sites like FactCheck.org guiding our thoughts through a framed narrative, at least if they’re not going to dig any deeper than that.
We all should beware of the developing apparatus of media control and internet corporations that are getting to choose who gets a voice, where they can share it, and what they get to say. That’s a very dangerous path.
www.infowars.com – Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation & Others Predicted up to 65 Million deaths via Coronavirus- In Simulation ran 3 months ago!
Johns Hopkins University – Pandemic simulation exercise spotlights massive preparedness gap. Nov. 6th 2019