As one contemplates—and experiences—the mad, topsy-turvy, inconsistent and patently absurd atmosphere of pandemia, one may be forgiven for thinking we are living inside a Lewis Carroll world of snarks, boojums, borogoves, Jubjub birds, Bandersnatches and Jabberwocks. It is becoming increasingly difficult to negotiate a blizzard of often conflicting reports, statistical findings and public recommendations emanating from the political and medical establishments.
We were initially told that the viral curve would be “flattened” in two weeks. Eighteen months later, in many places around the world, we are still wearing masks and enduring punitive lockdowns or restrictions. Most recently, New Zealand has gone into national lockdown after a single case was detected. One “jab” should have sufficed, then two were required, and now three, with perhaps more to come.
Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
“Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!”
-- Lewis Carroll, Jabberwocky
We know that medical protocol requires a minimum five-year trial period to validate a vaccine, perhaps more. After less than a year, the product is still in the experimental stage, yet it has been approved for emergency use and may soon be ratified by the FDA.
PCR testing of the asymptomatic population was supposed to be failproof, yet the Ct (Cycle threshold) rates are generally so high as to produce enormous numbers of false positives. Even The New York Times is quizzical. High amplification cycles are too sensitive to be definitive. Curiously, the CDC and the FDA are suddenly re-evaluating their advocacy.
Many state authorities and health officials believe in a “Zero Covid” recovery scenario before mandates and restrictions will be lifted. Yet it now widely known that the virus will be with us indefinitely, like the flu and the common cold. Covid is here to stay. Herd immunity may be the best option.
We were assured that the vaccines would render us immune to the disease. It now turns out that the vaccinated are suffering “breakthrough” cases. The numbers will vary according to the source, but “leakage” or “waning effectiveness” is a fact. The recent “Covid cluster” in a strict-entry, health-pass nightclub in Bordeaux (as well as in a Dutch club) is just another sign that vaccination is not a ticket to pharmaceutical heaven. But the blame will inevitably be placed on lax security.
The toves do slythe...
We know that viral/respiratory infections diminish significantly during the warm season; yet as Dr. Daniel Stock, who is a trained immunologist, asks: “Why is a vaccine that is supposedly so effective have a breakout in the middle of the summer when respiratory viral syndromes don’t do that?” As we have come to expect, Dr. Stock’s six-minute video has been taken down by YouTube and his claims “factchecked” to death by an innumerable host of politically complicit Internet sites and media shills. Open debate and informed argument are obviously not tolerated in the current repressive milieu. Dissenting views are ritually dismissed as junk, myth or “misinformation”—or simply suppressed.
We are informed that the recent spike in cases occurs among the unvaccinated, yet it is now known that the vaccines may not reliably block transmission. As Peter Smith writes in The Pipeline, “According to a CDC study and Public Health England, the viral load of those vaccinated who catch the virus is about equal to those unvaccinated…Those vaccinated can still catch the virus and pass it on.” Similarly, Harvard epidemiologist Dr. Michael Mina bluntly states that there will be “unabated transmission among the vaccinated.” Despite such occasional admissions, this worrisome trend will be downplayed or routinely debunked by the array of “interested parties”—the mainstream press, the Internet self-appointed watchdogs, and government-aligned medical practitioners—while the unvaccinated will continue to be scapegoated.
Distinguished virologists and epidemiologists, such as Nobel Laureate Dr. Luc Montagnier and the inventor of the mRNA vaccine himself, Dr. Robert Malone, have deposed, with considerable evidence, that a condition called Antibody dependent enhancement, which allows the pathogen to invade cells, will render the vaccinated prone to the proliferating emergence of variants. Indeed, the vaccine itself is understood to be a variant amplifier, that is, it trains new variants to escape immune systems. And sure enough, we now confront Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta, with doubtless more to come. Dr. Malone has further warned against the spurious way in which the vaccines have been tested and clinical data manipulated—and he should know.
The word “jab” has taken on a new valence and entered the common lexicon to signify an injection of the aforementioned gene therapy substance, an mRNA delivery system that is by no means what is popularly understood as a regular antibody vaccine. Nevertheless, we are assured that that these elixirs are effective and safe, despite the fact that adverse reactions continue to be reported (or massively underreported). An Open Letter from Doctors for COVID Ethics records a total for the EU/UK/USA of 34,052 vaccine deaths and 5.46 million injuries as of August 1, 2021. Those who administer the jabs are highly reluctant to consider or even question these figures.
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
My own GP will not hear of countervailing data and, to all intents and purposes, has banished me from his office, despite the Hippocratic oath he has sworn. He resolutely refuses to discuss the issue. The vaccines work, they are necessary, they are no different in their effect and function from previous vaccines, and all reports to the contrary are merely anecdotal and not to be credited. That’s the long and the short of it. The world’s best virologists (apart from the aforementioned)—authorities in their field like Sucharit Bhakdi, Peter McCullough, Byram Bridle, Peter Doshi, Geert Vanden Bossche, Christian Perronne and others who have warned against the vaccines are of no account to him. Perhaps he has not even heard of them, given that many “contrarian” scientists with advanced degrees, professional renown and extensive clinical experience have not only been attacked for trafficking in falsehoods and misdiagnostics but have also been summarily deplatformed.
I have come to regard my physician—and the many others like him—as Carrollian Jabberwocks, primed and determined to accept the government and Big Pharma line at all costs and ply the needled jab without let or hindrance. It makes some sense, I submit, to take Carroll’s advice, to rest by the meditative Tumtum tree and stand awhile in thought. There will be trouble, of course, for:
as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
It’s high time to unsheathe the “vorpal blade” and fight the burble back. I firmly believe that the vaccines should not be mandated, whether by government or corporate enterprises, but remain the personal decision of the individual — moreover, an individual who is privy to full disclosure regarding both sides of the debate, a task admittedly growing more and more mercurial under the prevailing rule of media and Internet censorship. Censorship almost always means there is a valid or important argument across the polemical meridian that the authorities and their journalist enablers do not want people to hear. Anything that challenges unexamined beliefs and rattles unsifted confidence must be cancelled.
Trust the science, said the Mad Hatter.
I have performed my own risk-benefit analysis and have decided to resist my Jabberwock’s dogmatic insistence. I take a modicum of comfort in the penultimate verse of Carroll’s poem.
And hast thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!”
He chortled in his joy.
I neither chortle nor am beamish with joy, but am convinced that the right to exercise one’s own decision regarding one’s bodily integrity and independence of judgment is fundamental and lawful in a functioning democracy. The data-welter is disorienting but does not excuse mental laziness and the refusal to pursue discovery as best one can. Otherwise, we are on the route to a state of social, political or medical apartheid as the saved and the damned, the elect and the disenfranchised, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, are rigorously segregated from one another, to the exclusion of the latter who will become social pariahs and cultural outcasts.
Mixed messages from the official sources will continue to ramify to add to our confusion. Celebrity medicos and opinion leaders will reverse themselves time and again. But the fact remains. The momes may rath outgrabe all they like, the slithy toves gimble, and the Jabberwocks flourish their implements, but a skeptical mind is a civil prerequisite, responsible inquiry is a moral and intellectual virtue, and a principle is a principle.