Introduction

Sometimes to get a message through the noise and distractions you have to be very persistent and willing to repeat, reissue, rephrase and restate it over and over until it sinks it.

Signs are though that it is sinking in and the COVID hoax is unraveling but these things don't always happen overnight so keep at it.

Hence the following article.

V@x Wars: The story so far

A brief overview

by Karl Hobbs

It has become evident that some sort of bug is circulating.

What it is exactly is not yet established beyond reasonable doubt because - and most people do not realise this as it is rarely mentioned by the media or the government - it hasn't been isolated yet.

It hasn't been photographed or physically seen through a microscope but we are assured by experts that it is - or must be - there.

So even though its existence as an entity rather than a phenomenon is not yet proven. we'll give it the benefit of the doubt and assume that whatever is circulating and making a few people ill and upsetting a whole lot more is in fact a tiny wriggly thing known as a virus.

It has been called the COVID19 virus. It is very, very similar in its effects to viruses referred to collectively and colloquially as "the flu" or "the common cold".

It behaves like a flu bug in so far as it can be unpleasant for some but is not a big deal for the vast majority of people who get mild or moderate symptoms for a bit before it goes away. Like a flu (or indeed a cold for the very frail/elderly) it can be more serious in some people who are elderly or already weakened from other illnesses.

Unlike a regular flu, which can afflict children or young people, the COVID bug has little effect on the young (unless in rare cases they are already extremely ill with some other ailment).

If it had been referred to as "a flu" no one would have freaked out very much especially as its behaviour, effects, symptoms and and statistics are very similar to what we call "the flu".

Observers have pointed out that as the government's objective was to make people afraid, the bug had to have another name not at all similar to "flu". Hence, "COVID19".

A test known as the "PCR test" has been widely used to all detect whether someone has COVID 19. This is often the only way they can know they have it because the symptoms are so mild or non existent.

The PCR test is purportedly more accurate than other tests in use such as the one used at airports which, per the PM, Health Secretary and Foreign Secretary, is only 7% accurate.

At this time there appear to be no completely reliable tests in use although the government claims that the PCR test only returns a false positive in about 2% of people tested.

It is believed by many, apparently, that the government would never lie to us, not even to enrich or further the agenda of its friends, because it is well known to comprise people incapable of lying. Therefore, we must believe what they say and accept the "2%" claim as honest and accurate.

Unfortunately, 2% of people tested accounts for almost all the positive cases "identified".

But another embarrassing problem has arisen that undermines the government narrative still further as it has now been revealed that the much-vaunted PCR test cannot actually detect the presence of a live infectious virus.

What it does detect is small trace remnants of the DNA of previous infections with Coronaviruses (which include what are referred to as "colds and flu" as well as the fancy-named COVID19).

Therefore, even for the small number of genuine positives as opposed to false positives, the test does not establish that the person actually has a live virus in their system.

It is generally agreed that the government must be aware of all this government knows all this. If one is to allege that it does not know it, one is hypothesising a level of irresponsible stupidity possibly unparrallled in British history.

As one observer succinctly put it,

"Nobody is that thick."

If one does not accept a level of stupidity that beggars belief one must then assume that the government is deliberately misrepresenting the test and what it is actually capable of detecting for reasons it has yet to make clear.

So we have a situation where nearly all the "positives" identified by the PCR test are false and even those that aren't do not prove the existence of the virus. Yet the positive results are claimed by the gov to prove that the person is a "COVID case". So far as the PCR test is concerned at any rate, this is simply not true.

Per government figures, this amounts to about 500 000 falsely claimed cases (2% of the 26.000,000 million tests done).

These thousands of "cases" are used - fraudulently in the opinion of many observers, doctors, scientists and so on -by the government as "evidence" that the COVID virus is spreading and this bogus spread of a "dangerous disease" is used as the justification for lockdowns and other methods of destroying the country.

It has also become something of a scandal that thousands of people may have been forced to isolate because of a false positive test either on themselves or because they were in the vicinity (such as the same restaurant) of someone who falsely tested positive.

It should be pointed out that the fraudulent nature of the PCR test and the thousands of false positives it has produced does not necessarily mean that the epidemic does not exist. It merely means that the test cannot and does not detect it. However, other factors such as the relatively low numbers of people exhibiting symptoms beyond what in any other year would have been known as "a touch of the flu" or a cold or a "chesty cough" (such as the one experienced by this writer in October 2019) and the relatively low number of deaths that can be confidently associated with the alleged virus suggest that the existence of an epidemic is largely fiction.

It has been noticed that the government is fond of using propaganda trigger words when talking about the alleged spread of this infection. Thus it refers to it repeatedly as this "dangerous disease" or similar words.

Yet the actual evidence and statistics - and even the government's Chief Medical Officer himself in a recorded biefing as long ago as last May - tell us that whilst the bug is (like a cold or the flu) dangerous for someone very elderly and/or very, it is not actually, so far as the overwhelming majority of people are concerned, more dangerous than flu. In fact, it might even be slightly less dangerous.

The similarities of symptoms, together with a drop this year in the number of flu cases apparently commensurate with the appearance of COVID cases, suggest that some -or many - cases that in earlier years would simply have been referred to as "flu" have this year been reclassified as "Covid".

This reclassification, if true and if done on a big enough scale, would of itself create sufficient "COVID" numbers to create the impression of a "COVID outbreak."

It is also possible, although as far as we know not yet proven, that COVID had been in circulation for many years prior to its being allegedly identified as a distinct virus. It was simply regarded as a mild, medium or bad flu. Deaths from it, if such occurred, would in that instance merely have been recorded as deaths arising from complications in elderly or vulnerable people infected with flu.

If it turns out that the COVID virus existed and has been in circulation for a long time, there may already be considerable immunity to it built up in the community. This may account for why a fraudulent test and its resultant fraudulent positives are needed to create suitably alarming "infection" numbers.

The "COVID deaths" stats, for instance, are not particularly high, and this may have prompted the government to keep focusing the public's attention on the false infection stats.

Yet even the not particularly scary mortality stats are now known to be false.

A COVID death is counted when a person dies within 28 days of testing positive for COVID19. But as we have seen, the widespread use of tests that do not do what it is claimed they do means that the considerable majority, if not all, of the "COVID cases" are false.

Therefore an unknown but probably high percentage of deaths counted as "COVID" deaths are false.

So, many are waking up to the possibility that the government has been lying and misrepresenting a situation to make it appear a lot worse than it is.

As one critic put it,

"Essentially we have a so-called "epidemic" based on smoke and mirrors - false stats and propaganda utterances relayed by government ministers, the media, and the big tech companies of the internet."

It is certainly true that the alleged "smoke and mirrors epidemic" contrasts sharply with observable reality.

Observable reality contradicts what one would expect to see happening if a killer epidemic were actually happening in the real world - there are no over-full hospitals operating at crisis levels, no bodies stacking up at undertakers, many people do not know a single person who has died of the alleged COVID disease, children are virtually virtually unaffected as are people under 60, the average age of alleged COVID related mortality is a year OLDER (82) than the average age of death from all causes etc.

In order to "save us from" the smoke-and-mirrors epidemic, new v@ccines have been rushed through without the requisite and common sense years of trials and tests to ensure they are safe and effective.

The testing was so negligent that only AFTER the vaccine was injected into people did it become evident that anyone prone to allergic reactions should avoid it.

This, of course, should have been picked up during testing and trails but it wasn't and many people have asked, how could such a glaring oversight occur? It then emerged that the v@x companies, when selecting people for their v@ccine trials, WEEDED OUT anyone likely to have an allergic reaction! This amounts to rigging the results and is extremely dishonest science.

What all this boils down to, evidently, is that in order to vaccinate ourselves against a bug that is not particularly threatening to most of us, we are expected to risk the improperly tested new vaccines whose short, mid and long term effects nobody knows at this time.

To be fair, it might turn out that the new vaccines are not particularly any more dangerous than any other vaccine but at this stage we simply do not know. We have to wait and see what happens over the next months and years to anyone brave enough to have offered themselves up as unpaid guinea pigs.

The government, self-evidently, thinks that it is perfectly all right and acceptable to take such a gamble with the health of millions of its citizens.

The v@x producers, however, are so non-confident of what their vaccines will do that they asked for and got from the government protection against prosecution should their formulas kill or harm anyone injected with them.

It has now further transpired that the manufacturers cannot say that their v@x prevents one from getting the virus or transmitting the it, as these things have not yet been tested for and proven.

And finally, the columnist and keen observer of the government's handling of the alleged crisis, Jon Davy, this morning wrote that,

"In a real epidemic that constituted a serious threat, if a safe and workable vaccine came to our rescue, the first people to be administered it would be our lords and masters, nobs and toffs, royalty, moguls, ministers and captains of this and that. However, in the case of this particular alleged epidemic the nobs and toffs, ministers and royalty are not first in line.

"The plebs who offer themselves up as unpaid guinea pigs in a country turned into a giant pharmaceutical test lab can go first.

Don't all rush at once."