We, as a society, continually fail to ask the pertinent questions. Is the reason because we lack intelligence or courage, or is there some other force at play?
How can Deliberately Forcing People to Suffer in Misery and Poverty not be Considered Evil?
Recently the World Health Organization asked countries to not pursue lockdowns in their effort to control COVID-19. The explanation given was that the consequence of lockdowns was the proliferation of misery and poverty. The WHO’s plea, now armed with the 20/20 clarity afforded by hindsight, can be written as follows: Lockdowns = Misery + Poverty.
Yet, Prime Minster Justin Trudeau, premiers like Ontario’s Doug Ford and Quebec’s —Legault, the vast majority of the mainstream media, much of the corporate world, our vaunted “experts”, and every triggered Karen want more of it for us. I ask again. How is that not demanding evil be done to us?
If 75% of Canadians support more lockdowns, as Global News claims, and deliberate poverty is evil, can Canadians call themselves good?
Is that not a fair question? If you don’t think so, then you don’t accept that pushing people into destitution and misery is evil. If that is indeed the case, then live up to the courage of your convictions by looking past and future lockdown victims in the eye and telling them you insist they suffer more, because that is exactly what you support. (I suggest you bring more than “but the experts said cases are exploding” to that fight.)
Foresight Versus Hindsight
Can you recognize evil before it manifests itself or does it only come into focus after seeing the vile consequences it leaves in its wake? If we’re looking at mass graves, then we’re already too late for evil has successfully fed its Reaper family. It’s easy to spot evil then, isn’t it? Yes, we’re all gifted with the brilliant clarity of hindsight, however, we are in dire need of a little more foresight.
Foresight, however, doesn’t have proof in hand so its predictions will be quickly rejected without the involvement of a key ingredient: trust.
With respect to the novel coronavirus COVID-19, that foresight came in the form of Model projections that warned of a looming catastrophe if we didn’t act now. The “experts” believed. The politicians believed. The media believed. And we, trusting souls that we are, believed and accepted lockdowns as the solution.
However, as the consequences are admittedly evil, it means that our collective foresight served, and sadly continues to serve, evil. It also means that the foresight exhibited by those who spoke out against lockdowns was accurate, untrusted, and rejected.
Consequences Speak Truth
Regardless of your what your trusted sources tell you, if it is wrong and you accept and act on it, the consequences will not be appreciated. If you find yourself in a heated disagreement and you believe your opponent when they lie about getting violent, there is a lesson about trust in the beating that follows. Trust can be extremely dangerous, just ask everyone whose lives have been destroyed by con men, or poverty pimping lockdowns.
Regardless of the source – left, right, progressive, conservative, religious, atheistic - Fake News is by definition, Deceit. Logically, then, it is insane to trust Fake News because it can only ever deliver negative consequences. In fact, those harsh consequences are a clue that Fake News is at play.
Poverty and misery are negative consequences and as such, speak to the truth of the information that spawns them. The logical deduction is this: like it or not, COVID-19 reporting MUST be Fake News AND Fake News MUST be evil.
If I’ve lost you with that last statement, then I know I’ve run directly into trust issues. However, rejecting a truth doesn’t make it a lie, it simply means you still trust the liars. Sorry, but logic is what it is, and it has zero sympathy for feelings.
Support Canada Free Press
Trick Questions.
If 999 experts advocate for Theory A, and 1 expert advocates for Theory B, which theory do you want to choose?
The Theory that is right regardless.
You come to a fork in the road, one path trends downhill and the other uphill, which route do you take?
The one that gets you to your destination.
Now, if Fake News pushes the wrong Theory or route, the choice you make will depend solely on trust because you simply don’t know which is right. If you trust Fake News, you will choose poorly and if you don’t, you will choose wisely. The key is knowing whether or not the news is Fake or Real, and that can be near impossible to discern because Fake News is so excellent at what it does you will want to believe them. The reality of lockdowns suggests many Canadians still do.
I KNOW COVID-19 is Fake News. Do you trust me?
I’m not guessing. It isn’t a subjective opinion. I could explain it in significant logical detail, and I’ve tried, but my ideas regarding information analysis lack at least three things: a current frame of reference, credibility, and trust, so it’s understandable they struggle to gain traction. It is a brand-new IT based way of evaluating information and people just don’t get it, yet.
However, trust will follow credibility, and credibility will spring from the accuracy of my assertions and predictions. If you recall, the media pumped a lot of panic with their “we’re all gonna’ die reporting. The world’s survival rate has already proven them wrong (no, the draconian response didn’t save us, which will be proven in time too) so maybe my unpopular statements to the contrary deserve a little respect.
So, as much as I despise our evil lockdown response to COVID-19, those foolish actions will go a long way to establishing the credibility of my information theories.
I’ve made numerous unpopular COVID-19 claims since April and they have been expensive in the sense they’ve cost me employment opportunities and the respect of long-time friends. So be it.
Those predictions included the following.
Lockdowns will bring pain, misery, and suffering. The WHO now agrees!
Mask mandates will not stop the spread of the virus but will cause severe respiratory issues and bacterial infections. Watch for the evidence, it is starting to come out.
Lockdowns are a test of our willingness to accept tyranny. Watch for further lockdowns and future use of predictive models to legitimize totalitarian actions. (Climate and COVID are IDENTICAL in form, just not speed.)
Lastly, I called for a Trump tsunami on October 10, right at the time when polls were shouting about Biden’s massive lead.
We will soon see on the last point, but how are my unpopular predictions doing so far? I haven’t had to walk back a single one, and likely won’t have to.
Can the mainstream media say the same?
Mark Gray hails from the Kirkland Lake, Ontario area and has spent over 30 years as an Analyst/Developer in Big IT, mostly in Calgary’s Oil-And-Gas Sector. Creator of an non-partisan, analytical methodology that seeks out and identifies Bias and Deceit embedded in weaponized information.
Recently the World Health Organization asked countries to not pursue lockdowns in their effort to control COVID-19. The explanation given was that the consequence of lockdowns was the proliferation of misery and poverty. The WHO’s plea, now armed with the 20/20 clarity afforded by hindsight, can be written as follows: Lockdowns = Misery + Poverty.
Yet, Prime Minster Justin Trudeau, premiers like Ontario’s Doug Ford and Quebec’s —Legault, the vast majority of the mainstream media, much of the corporate world, our vaunted “experts”, and every triggered Karen want more of it for us. I ask again. How is that not demanding evil be done to us? 
