By Elder Arnie Suntag
As millions ponder how we arrived at such a fearsome moment in the history of our world, the words of Rahm Emanuel, the former mayor of Chicago, resonate in the minds of those who desperately want honest answers to the conundrum that has engulfed their lives. The phrase he coined, “never allow a good crisis to go to waste,” should serve as an inducement to reasonably question the origin and purpose of the draconian measures that have been employed to address the purported danger created by COVID-19. Can the broad changes that are being made to the social fabric of our society be justified through sound scientific principles and altruistic intentions, or do they raise the specter of an evolving movement with ominous undercurrents? Does this paradigm shift represent a reasonable response to a biological cataclysm, or is it rooted in a long-standing agenda designed to reshape our society from top to bottom? In other words, is it a crisis, or is it a contrivance?
The sad truth about many in our country today is that they are naive and highly impressionable. They tend to idolize medical experts, exalt government leadership, and often rely exclusively on the narratives espoused by mainstream media outlets that are highly politicized and fundamentally mercenary in nature. This creates an ideal opportunity for unscrupulous individuals to lull an unsuspecting populace into a false sense of security while simultaneously usurping their freedoms. Imagine that — altering the very underpinnings of a society without even a whimper from those who are being victimized. It is a fait accompli — a successful dissemination of a large and carefully constructed fabrication that came in under the radar. In the words of Adolf Hitler, one of the most notorious and malevolent figures in the history of our civilization, “The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.” He intuitively knew that mixing a few truths with a gargantuan lie could deceive an entire nation. That same principle is being played out today on the stages of Washington DC through partisan politics and camouflaged initiatives. Regardless of which side of the aisle one may choose to align with, the truth is that the oppositional narratives and political wrangling represent nothing more than a carefully crafted Hegelian dialectic designed to draw the uninitiated into a web of deception.
In order to understand the real truth about the COVID-19 pandemic, it is necessary to first consider history and to understand the prevailing medical mindset. Interestingly enough, the characterization of various illnesses has changed radically over time. Consider measles, for example. Many of us experienced the so-called childhood diseases — measles, mumps, and chickenpox. We survived these illnesses unscathed and with a natural immunity that prevents a recurrence. In those days, measles was considered essentially a mundane and commonplace occurrence. Infected children were kept home from school while parents attended to the fever and discomfort caused by the virus. Any deaths associated with measles were due to secondary infections or comorbidities – an issue that was more challenging to address at that time than it is today.
However, the CDC now describes measles as a serious and potentially deadly disease, coincidentally bolstering the need for the MMR vaccine and the requirement to administer it. In other words, the perception of the measles has morphed from a somewhat routine, albeit unpleasant childhood illness, to a deadly disease. The same metamorphosis applies to some of the other diseases that were prevalent decades ago. They would be considered perilous by today’s medical establishment, even though many of us survived them without ill effects and, in most cases, with a natural immunity. To put this paradigm shift into perspective, we need to consider the medical viewpoint on the other side of the spectrum. The safety and efficacy of various procedures to diagnose disease has also metamorphosed. Decades ago, prior to performing dental x-rays, dentists would ask their patients if they had received a chest x-ray within the past six months. Generally, if that were the case, the procedure would not be performed due to concerns about unnecessary exposure to ionizing radiation — despite the fact that such x-rays involve relatively low levels of radiation. Nowadays, however, most medical practitioners will utilize CT scans, often without reservation, to diagnose disease.
Ironically, one abdominal CT scan can exceed the equivalent of 200 or more chest x-rays – all at one time! What has changed? Only the mindset — not the dangers of ionizing radiation. There are presumably safer imaging methods, but these are not always covered by insurance. So, costs and expedience drive the approach. My point is that the way diagnostic procedures, treatments, and the diseases themselves are characterized in today’s medical model has assumed a whole new perspective driven primarily by profit, expedience, and of course politics. In the case of COVID-19 however, there is apparently another agenda at work.
The first question that begs an honest answer is, just how dangerous is COVID-19? Much of the fearmongering instigated by the mainstream media has been amplified by comparing the possible outcome of the COVID-19 outbreak to the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic that killed between 50 and 100 million people worldwide. However, we need to put this less-than-subtle comparison into perspective. The ability to manage comorbidities and the effectiveness of hygiene practices during the early 20th century was abysmal by today’s standards. While any flu outbreak may present major challenges in terms of mortality, these factors were arguably a prime reason for the substantial death toll during the 1918 pandemic. The fact is, virtually any serious respiratory illness can pose grave concerns for the elderly or those with pre-existing medical conditions – not just COVID-19. But while it is true that this novel coronavirus is highly contagious and responsible for producing a severe immune response (cytokine storm) leading to adverse outcomes, the statistics simply do not support the hype being promoted to generate the fear and panic that has gripped millions worldwide.
Initially, the mortality rate for COVID-19 appeared to be about two or three percent. However, the CDC has now released a report placing the mortality rate as low as 0.4 percent, which is certainly closer to the mortality rate typically seen with the flu. The truth is that it may in fact be even lower, since only a fraction of the SARS-CoV-2 infected population has been identified, confirmed through laboratory testing, and officially reported as COVID-19 cases. Furthermore, according to informed sources, including highly respected physicians throughout the nation, death certificates are being prepared in such a way as to favor a COVID-19 cause of death. Cases in which a patient may have in fact died of other causes such as heart attack or stroke are still being recorded as COVID-19 deaths if the patient tests positive for the virus.
Ironically, even with this obvious effort to artificially inflate the death toll, the mortality rate is still relatively low. Even if it were to turn out to be three percent or higher, this does not begin to compare too many other diseases that should raise considerable alarm if they were ever to get loose on our shores. Consider Ebola, for example. The mortality rate for infection with this virus can be as high as 80-90 percent – a far cry from any of the statistics published or even projected for COVID-19. Thus, the idea that COVID-19 is a deadly disease is absurd based upon these facts. So, what is actually going on here?
As the wave of authoritarian mandates dominates the populace with social distancing measures and lockdowns as a means of combating a purportedly deadly virus, there are those who recognize the inherent danger of such measures and wonder about their efficacy. The fact is, we have never before in history quarantined healthy people to manage a disease outbreak, particularly where the disease does not present an overwhelming risk of mortality. The logical, rational, and empirically viable approach is to isolate the sick. We have been repeatedly warned about the R0 value of COVID-19, highlighting the highly contagious nature and virulence of this disease. Yet, the R0 value for measles and other viral diseases are several times that of COVID-19, but during outbreaks of those diseases no one ever dreamed of instituting social distancing or lockdowns to manage them, nor can it be said that failure to do so resulted in a high mortality rate. That very idea is virtually impossible to prove empirically. Presumably, the overstated concern about the infectious nature of COVID-19 has been the basis for justifying the draconian measures that stand in dire contrast to freedom of conscience and the rights and privileges afforded by the Constitution.
The introduction of social distancing, quarantines for asymptomatic individuals, and lockdowns, are unprecedented and scientifically untenable. From an epidemiological standpoint, these practices, taken together, are an aberration for numerous reasons. For one thing, there are many conflicting reports on the prescribed distance necessary to safely prevent droplet infection. Furthermore, there is no way to empirically prove that such measures can reduce the risk of infection. They are completely hypothetical, particularly considering that all the disease projections are based upon mathematical models to begin with and not upon double-blind studies or clinical experience. In fact, the claim that these measures reduce the spread of disease has been all but debunked by virtue of the reports in several venues that show the majority of hospitalizations occurred in people who remained at home – an obviously paradoxical finding. Finally, the overused mantra of “flattening the curve” represents by far one of the most misleading concepts of all.
What most do not realize is that the objective of this proposition is to slow the spread of disease in order to reduce the burden on the healthcare system. Unfortunately, it is an epidemiological fact that the same number of people may ultimately die until herd immunity is established. In other words, these measures will not reduce the number of infections or deaths. They will merely spread them out over a longer period of time – thus flattening the curve and thereby keeping hospitals and urgent care facilities from becoming overloaded. So, in short, we have endorsed the subjugation of millions, we have shut down our economy, and we have virtually turned our entire society upside down on the basis of a mere idea, in order to combat a virus that has not proven to be the menace the so-called experts claim it to be.
It does not require a stroke of genius to recognize that there is something else at play in this now all-too-familiar drama. All one has to do is to consider the consequences resulting from the measures that have been employed to supposedly mitigate the spread of COVID-19. The curtailing of personal freedoms has invariably caused far more harm than the disease itself. Millions are out of work. Many businesses, particularly mom and pop shops that were built through years of hard work and personal sacrifice, are now shut down permanently. Even some of the largest and most prominent corporate entities are filing for bankruptcy, leaving a rift that cannot be bridged even if the economy should recover.
Distribution channels have been disrupted, leading to unnecessary shortages of essential supplies. Hospitals have turned away patients requiring elective procedures, while at the same time furloughing medical staff because of the expected COVID-19 caseload that never materialized. This has caused many individuals to avoid seeking medical attention for critical care issues, and some have died as a result. Paranoia has gripped millions, radically altering their behavior toward family, friends, and neighbors. Child abuse and domestic violence have greatly increased, leaving irreparable scars that will last a lifetime. Because of the anxiety and depression caused by job losses, marital discord, and lockdowns that are tantamount to house arrest, the suicide rate has gone through the roof.
The anger and frustration experienced by many because of the lockdowns has created a tinderbox in our cities leading to the kind of crime and violence we are witnessing in the widespread George Floyd protests (no doubt spurred on by the provocateurs, political pundits, and social media bots). Even the freedom to hold worship services – the only hope that many have to cope with the prevailing circumstances – have been either heavily restricted or eliminated altogether – an indisputable violation of First Amendment rights, notwithstanding the dubious claim that the COVID-19 outbreak poses a medical emergency. And the list goes on.
While nations have survived pandemics and loss of life before throughout history without irreversible consequences, the current disruption of social norms through scientifically unproven methodologies and unrestrained authoritarianism has already caused irreparable damage, not to mention the needless death toll which has, not surprisingly, exceeded that of COVID-19. Worse yet, it has been boldly proclaimed that these methodologies will continue, under the guise of protecting the public from an invisible enemy. This chicanery is leaving an indelible imprint on our children. Those who are not already the victims of child abuse now have etched in their minds the belief that one must keep a safe distance from others because of possible infection with a deadly disease. And they are not alone.
Adults are being systematically deprived of the intimacy associated with interpersonal relationships that characterize daily life. After all, we are tactile creatures. Having the freedom to engage in physical closeness – handshakes, hugs, and the like, is an essential human need. This has been and continues to be obstructed by baseless disease prevention practices and unwarranted government mandates. In short, the restrictions being imposed upon the populace are the hallmarks of a prison system – not a free society.
The management of the COVID-19 outbreak has violated the boundaries of human decency and disrupted all that we hold dear, merely to satisfy a theoretical construct and to possibly fulfill a long-standing nefarious agenda. To say that the cure is worse than the disease is a gross understatement. It is an unprecedented and unsupportable foray into sociological suicide — the result of reckless decision-making and policies that defy sound reasoning.
The most pervasive question in the minds of many is, why was this boondoggle allowed to happen in the first place? It not a stretch to say that medical authorities such as Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, the leading figures in the mitigation efforts, are essentially academicians — ivory tower medical authorities who have lost touch with everyday life in America. They are not currently practicing physicians. They are not on the front lines where they can directly assess the impact of their decisions. Rather, they are working with mathematical, computer-based models and hypothetical scenarios. Many may insist that they and others on their team are doing the best they can with the policies that have been implemented. But, is this a realistic assessment under the circumstances?
Fauci and Birx are obviously intelligent individuals who surely must recognize the psychosocial, economic, and logistical ramifications of even entertaining such policies. In light of the facts on the record, any reasonable and prudent person would surmise that there must be something else driving these policies – policies that are now adversely impacting hundreds of millions. It is not a conspiracy theory or a politically inspired narrative. If you remove the blinders long enough to take an objective look at the wreckage that has been wrought by these unprecedented draconian measures, the only possible conclusion one can reach is that there is an agenda behind it all that has little to do with a virus. Where is all of this leading?
It is an unequivocal fact that what we are seeing today did not have to happen. It is interesting to note that, in the beginning of the outbreak, wearing masks was discouraged. Yet, perhaps the only rational method for mitigating the spread of disease at that point would have been to require masks to be worn in public – at least until the purported pandemic had subsided. Through the protection masks offer from coughs and sneezes, a key vector in the spread of the disease would have been curtailed. The virus would not have had hosts to infect and perhaps within a few weeks the outbreak would have been contained. There would have been no basis for the draconian measures that are now proving to be far more deadly than COVID-19 itself. As we know, however, masks were not available when the outbreak began because manufacturers such as 3M had moved their facilities to China. At least, that is what we were led to believe. Ironically, however, a concerted effort was made to rapidly produce ventilators due to a purported shortage. Ventilators are complex and expensive pieces of equipment.
Notwithstanding, companies such as Ford and GM were able to retool their facilities seemingly overnight to produce ventilators by the tens of thousands. A very large percentage of these have not been used even to this date and, ironically, in those cases where COVID-19 patients were incubated, only 10 percent survived. Many physicians even advised against the use of ventilators and questioned the reasoning behind their mass production after the Defense Production Act was invoked. Why then, was the same manufacturing urgency not applied to accelerate the production of personal protective equipment such as masks and gloves, which are far easier to produce than complex pieces of electronic equipment such as ventilators, and far more necessary to meet the needs of the public and healthcare professionals alike? Ironically, masks and gloves are still not readily available to the general public, even though masks are now being required in some venues. Obviously, something is amiss.
Ironically, there is yet another side to the aforementioned anomaly that goes even deeper. It is in fact antithetical. Wearing masks for extended periods of time can be hazardous to your health. The reason is simple. There is a delicate balance between oxygen and carbon dioxide in the body, and when this homeostasis is disrupted, illness can result – in some cases, even death. If a person suffers from respiratory alkalosis, where the pH of the blood is elevated due to hyperventilation (sometimes resulting from anxiety), the treatment is simply to have them breath into a paper bag. This process causes the expelled carbon dioxide to be re-inhaled, effectively lowering the blood’s pH. Breathing into a mask has essentially the same effect. Doing so for extended periods of time, particularly while exerting oneself, can result in respiratory acidosis which is known to impede immune system function and increase susceptibility to infection – the exact opposite of the purpose for wearing a mask.
Wearing a mask while exercising creates an even worse scenario. There have been deaths associated with this phenomenon. Interestingly enough, extensive information on this subject can be found in peer reviewed articles from journals such as the American Journal of Physiology, available through NIH – Dr. Fauci’s organization. The question that must be asked then, is why would any public health agency require or even suggest that masks be worn if there is a tendency for this to increase the risk of infection? And if that is not odd enough, there is also the paradox surrounding the hand sanitizers that are strongly recommended and, in some cases, required. People have become accustomed to slathering these on without a second thought. This is potentially dangerous over the long haul. Most hand sanitizers in use today contain ethyl alcohol as the primary antibacterial ingredient.
Originally, these contained triclosan for which studies have proven that repeated use can result in the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria. This is part of the reason MRSA became ubiquitous. While many of the triclosan-based hand sanitizers have been replaced by those that contain ethyl alcohol because of these concerns, more recent studies have shown that these may be equally culpable in creating bacterial resistance. Most hand sanitizers also contain a number of chemical additives including fragrances that are not regulated by the FDA. Some of these additives are known to be carcinogenic. In short, wearing masks and using hand sanitizers actually impedes our immune system from doing what it is designed to do, thus rendering us more susceptible to dangerous pathogens. One would reasonably expect that the leadership at NIH, CDC, and DHHS should be well aware of these facts.The last and greatest fallacy in what has become an apparent charade is the development and implementation of a vaccine for COVID-19. The fearmongers have convinced the multitudes that the only hope for returning to a somewhat normal life in America is the introduction of a vaccine. While still a perhaps speculative notion, such a vaccine may very well be mandated under the guise of protecting the health and safety of the public, judging from past events. To accomplish this, the COVID-19 outbreak and the purportedly imminent “second wave” will not merely be compared to the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918, but rather identified as analogous to the smallpox epidemic of the early 1900s in which vaccinations were mandated. It will be framed as a medical emergency, thus allowing government agencies to legally enforce mandatory vaccination laws, unless a challenge is mounted through the courts – a potentially difficult effort in light of Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the Supreme Court decision of 1905.
The fact is that it has always been the mantra of most in mainstream medicine and public health that vaccination is necessary to prevent epidemics by establishing herd immunity. From an immunological standpoint, the method by which vaccines confer immunity against disease is genuinely scientifically sound. The problem is with the vaccine components. If vaccines contained only an attenuated form of a pathogen, that would leave far fewer safety concerns. However, vaccines also contain stabilizers, adjuvants and preservatives, many of which have been proven harmful to human health. And while it can be argued that the smallpox vaccine saved millions of lives, it was later discovered that it also spawned a latent infection with a virus known as SV40 which has become recognized as a major factor in the development of various cancers. Millions of baby boomers who received this vaccine are still at increased risk for these cancers today.
The obvious questions and concerns surrounding COVID-19 notwithstanding, millions of Americans will be all-too-ready to roll up their sleeves for the vaccine in order to be free of the oppressive regulations that have kept them imprisoned for a seemingly interminable period of time. At the same time, they will not discern the rather ingenious manipulation by which they have been misled. The indoctrination has been insidious. It is how proponents of a vaccine, such as Bill Gates, who has an obvious pecuniary interest in the vaccine, have taken advantage of the naivety of much of the population. A vaccine for SARS or MERS was never developed, although one could argue that it was due to lack of interest after these diseases effectively ran their course.
Yet somehow, the genome for SARS-CoV-2 was mapped in record time and the development of a vaccine underway to be potentially made available and mass-produced within a year, circumventing the usual FDA approval process. Yet, we have vaccines today that have been in use for decades, for which safety and efficacy debates are still raging. The sudden appearance of a new vaccine on the scene in record time, obviously without long-term testing and clinical experience, raises some serious questions that I cannot even begin to address without writing a book on the subject. To take this a step further, it is notoriously difficult to develop a vaccine for COVID-19 that will be consistently effective for the same reason that flu vaccines often fail. RNA-based viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 tend to mutate, thus potentially requiring a different version of the vaccine, so to speak, or a new vaccine entirely. Thus, the idea that a single vaccine is going to eradicate COVID-19 and return life in America to normal is a pipe dream. Of course, it does leave open the opportunity for its proponents to advocate for the administration of repeated doses, or booster shots, at regular intervals.
It is possible that this idea will evolve perhaps because of a flaw in the reasoning of those who orchestrated the vaccine-oriented solution in the first place. Initially, it was announced by these authoritative sources that those who contracted COVID-19 and recovered possessed antibodies that would confer natural immunity. Of course, if that were the case, why would a vaccine be needed? After all, this is what a vaccine does. It exposes the body to an attenuated form of a pathogen, resulting in the production of neutralizing antibodies. By changing the narrative and casting doubt upon the natural immunity of recovered COVID-19 patients, the argument for the use of a vaccine can be successfully prosecuted.
The bottom line is that there is a fundamental issue surrounding not only the vaccine quandary, but the entire COVID-19 story that few fail to recognize. This failure is due essentially to backward reasoning. It may be the result of public education that for decades has failed to foster critical thinking. Most are no longer capable of thinking outside the box, and those who possess an advantage over them either through legal authority or affluence know this all too well. Thus, they can easily capitalize on their impediment. Indeed, the issue is about freedom of choice. If for example, an individual elects to forego a proposed vaccine and assumes the associated risk, that should be their prerogative. Will they realistically place others at risk because of their decision? Certainly not those who elect to receive the vaccine, since they are immunized and thus protected from those who are not. It is really that simple. To frame it any other way is nothing but a ruse.
No agency should have the audacity to decide what is best for a competent and healthy human being, nor should they deprive that individual of the right to protect themselves from what they deem a risk to their health. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as stated in the Declaration of Independence should never be abrogated by any governmental authority. Liberty is a precious human right. It was Patrick Henry who said, “give me liberty or give me death” in a speech he made to the Second Virginia Convention on March 23, 1775 highlighting the vital importance of freedom from oppression. No human being would ever choose to live in a cage, even if it is a gilded cage. Yet there are those who will continually challenge this notion, whether it is to achieve their eugenicist agenda or to profit from the mass dissemination of a vaccine. They will leave no stone unturned in their efforts to achieve their goals, even if it requires subterfuge, lawbreaking, and perhaps genocide.
The riots breaking out nationwide over the murder committed by a corrupt police officer and his cohorts in Minneapolis are highly illustrative of how the anger created by the COVID-19 lockdowns has opened the door for political activists and domestic terrorists to provoke a mob mentality and exacerbate an already unmanageable situation — merely for political gain. After all, no reasonable person can possibly correlate the right to protest a terrible injustice with the looting and destruction that has engulfed cities everywhere. These are antithetical, counterproductive, and incidentally illegal activities. If you were to ask one of the protesters what it is they specifically want to see happen as a result of their efforts, they will not have an answer. That’s because there is no answer. The violent protests are merely an effort to ratchet up the fear and turmoil that already plagues millions of people because of the COVID-19 fiasco, spurred on by provocateurs with a political agenda.
As far as the circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 predicament is concerned, it is difficult to digest the fact that there are individuals in key positions of authority or affluence that would create a scenario so heinous as to utterly disrupt the livelihood, lifestyle, and indeed the very lives of millions for political dominance or financial gain. Yet, an unbiased view of the sequence of events surrounding the COVID-19 story plainly paint a picture of a government infrastructure rife with corruption and an elite tier of society that cares more about profit than about the lives of millions of people. What we are witnessing unfold in our country is perhaps the greatest social experiment in the history of the human race – and the greatest threat to the very existence of those who are oblivious to this despicable stratagem.
This is not the America I grew up in. It has become a Godless society that no longer holds any respect for the rule of law, much less the Golden Rule that is not enforced by human agencies. It has become a free-for-all in the idiom of Aleister Crowley, whose infamous quote, “do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” aptly portrays the sheer chaos and corruption that has overrun the nation from the halls of Congress to the inner city ghettos. Still, millions who are suffering in great anguish, garbed obediently in masks and gloves, are facing each day completely deluded and without hope of extrication. They are the victims of a monumental hoax, the magnitude of which exceeds any previous episode in the annals of history, yet they are completely ignorant of the fraud to which they have been unscrupulously subjected.
What people will allow themselves to be subjected to in the name of safety and comfort never ceases to amaze me. I can only hope and pray that the misled will wake up before it is too late. Some already have. Regardless of whether or not this happens, the so-called COVID-19 crisis will, in the final summation, prove to be a contrivance. That fact will not go entirely unnoticed. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
About the author: Elder Arnie Suntag is the founder and president of Walk of Faith, an organization that conducts seminars and educational series on health and disease prevention and provides outreach services to the community.
Walk of Faith Media
PO Box 4124
Bisbee, Arizona 85603