A Specter Looms
A threat in the shadows, escaping scrutiny
This is Part 1 of a 2-part essay — In the spirit of the days at the doorstep of winter, observed across cultures for remembering the souls of those who have passed.
In The Masque of the Red Death, Edgar Allan Poe tells the tale of a fictional kingdom whose population has been halved by a deadly plague. Prince Prospero gathers together friends, knights, and dames to a well-provisioned and secluded abbey. The courtiers believe themselves to be secure, in defiance of the contagion, and turn their backs on the subjects outside the palatial walls. After months of hiding, Prospero throws an extravagant masquerade ball. The revelers are happy and giddy, feverishly carried by a delirium and waking dreams.
At the stroke of midnight, some of the revelers begin to become aware of a mysterious masked figure whom they had not noticed before. The figure wears a costume like that of a corpse and a mask that calls forth the scarlet horror of the plague: the Red Death. Paralyzed by a nameless awe, the crowd allows the mysterious reveler to penetrate all of rooms of the luxurious imperial suite, until Prospero finally rushes to confront the disguised intruder. But he is too late. The mysterious figure is no reveler—it is the Red Death itself, come like an assassin in the night. No one survives.
On the surface, the tale tells the story of inevitability; but at the deeper heart of Poe’s tale are the human failings of hubris, excess, and carelessness that summon forth a specter, the very manifestation of death, into an artificial nest of security.
Are we, right now, in the presence of a specter—one that goes unnoticed as cacophony abounds?
A Field of Rabbit Holes
The last 3 years have seen a dizzying array of theories and hypotheses attempting to establish causality for the equally dizzying array of harms and side effects observed in the context of the COVID injectable products. Nearly in parallel, the ever-spiraling couplet of ‘lab-origin’ vs ‘zoonosis’ continues to compete for our attention, indicating that for some, the so-called ‘origin of the virus’ might be more important than the official response to it.
From a wider vantage point, it can legitimately seem as if there is a belief that it is somehow the dissident’s responsibility to solve a mystery that would explain the criminal madness that has been foisted upon the public. It should be noted that these investigative pursuits are not necessarily a bad thing, so long as they do not take on the pull of a metaphorical black hole for our attention.
And yet, it wouldn’t be a stretch to argue that they already have.
Like Prospero’s revelers that did not notice the specter of death in their midst, hyper-focus on particular details or aspects of a problem can often lead to a distorted view or erroneous conclusions because too few criteria are addressed, or attention paid at a micro-scale is allowed to override macro or foundational concerns.
It’s much like the classic problem of missing the forest for the trees.
Over the last year, the evidence for synthetic DNA contamination and undisclosed constituents in the COVID injectable products has continued to mount. Research from the US, Canada, Germany, and Australia have combined to demonstrate that the findings are not flukes and point to yet more undisclosed health risks from the COVID jabs.
As important context, it is extremely important to remember that there has been no comprehensive public scrutiny and surveillance1 of the various versions of COVID shots. Even so, the growing body of evidence points to what appears to be the very real likelihood that DNA fragments and other undisclosed impurities are to be found in every lot and vial of the mRNA COVID injectables.
This ought not be unexpected, in part, because the source of contamination is woven into the process of production, and eliminating that contamination is both challenging and expensive.
Predictably, the so-called ‘fact-checkers’ and establishment voices have risen in opposition to the findings of this research, hand-waiving away concerns and labeling the findings as ‘misinformation’. As with so many of these kinds of highly technical issues, the discussion and commentary has entered a spiraling contentious whirlpool which the majority of the public mostly chooses to ignore.
Before going further, it should be said that following this contamination saga is important, but it should rightly be seen as a subset of the larger COVID debacle, and ought not divert concern away from what may be deemed more fundamental issues.
The significance of the contamination story lies not just in the elevated risks for cancer and the possible fallout from modified genetic material and interaction with the human genome; but perhaps more importantly, it provides hard evidence for demonstrating both the horribly shoddy quality of the shots themselves and the equally horrendous ‘regulatory’ processes which enabled its use. Perhaps the most important takeaway is that it underscores the necessity of viewing the COVID injectable products as genetic prodrugs and not ‘vaccines’.2
Prodrugs are medications that change into an active form once they are introduced into the body. A genetic prodrug (aka, gene therapy) is subject to a unique review pathway with regard to drug approval. This pathway was not used for the COVID injectable products.
Gene Therapy?
Many commenters have sought to correct the reference to the COVID mRNA shots as a ‘vaccine’ and instead apply the label ‘gene therapy’. This may have validity from a regulatory classification standpoint, but it can be argued that this is also a misnomer. The word ‘gene’ may be acceptable, but ‘therapy’, at its root, connotes something which is therapeutic. The modern (pharmaceutical) use of the word ‘therapy’ actively works to morph the reading of that word into something decidedly grayer, as in a ‘service’ or ‘treatment’.
Etymology (and most people’s gut instinct) points to something more specific.
Therapy comes from the Greek therapeia, “curing, healing”, and from therapeuein meaning “to cure, treat medically”.
These shots certainly aren’t healing. The shots are harming. They certainly don’t make people healthier. The net result has been increased death and disease, not health.
It is really a misrepresentation to call these shots a therapy at all, genetic or otherwise.
It is also not without a dark irony that a little searching finds that the term ‘gene therapy’ was coined to distinguish it from the more decidedly Orwellian connotations of ‘human genetic engineering’.3
Please watch this excerpt from a conversation with Jessica Rose toward the end 2023.
Misdirection and a Cloaked Objective
Hyper-focus on singular problems or mechanisms of harm can function as a form of misdirection and lead to a kind of myopia, which is the soil for the following kind of thinking to take hold:
“The platform is fine, a few bits were botched, but we can fix those ‘flaws’, and then it will all be awesome.”
No, it won’t.
Imagine, if you will, a pronouncement from the jab proponents, who might proclaim:
“We’ve cleaned up the process—there’s no more DNA contamination. This product is now really safe and effective.”
or
“We’ve gotten rid of the SV40 promoter sequence. That was a previous mistake. We’re all good now.”
This isn’t very far from the claims that have been made about targeting currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.
“The reason why those early shots didn’t work so well is they were aimed at an old variant. We’re working on being better about staying up to date. Everyone should get the new shot.”
We’ve already seen this, and we should expect more of this going forward.
Stepping back, we might pause to consider that there is something else here that is being shielded from scrutiny. Something dangerous. Something ‘precious’.
It is lurking in the shade, like a specter, largely unrecognized and allowed to slip past critical discussions. Obscured and unannounced, it advances, making its way, reeking of death.
It has been there since the beginning, and decades before.
What is this thing that goes largely unmentioned? Where does it fit in?
We should be frank: these COVID injectable products were never needed.
COVID was a highly organized operation that implemented incredible policy-based damage, certainly far more than the harm attributed to a purported infectious disease which posed little threat to the overwhelming majority of the population.
COVID provided the momentum and impetus—the fear—necessary to execute a carefully laid (and rehearsed) plan:
The declaration of a ‘public health emergency’ awakened the implementation of long-laid executive powers invested in the Department of Health and Human Services.
This enabled the National Security State and Department of Defense to implement Emergency Use authorized countermeasures, which allowed the evasion of normal drug safety and product testing.
Individuals like Barbara Birx managed the policy.
Dashboards publicized undigested horror-statistics, feeding the narrative.
Pharma was employed as military contractors to produce and distribute black-box products, liability free.
The CDC sold the official story and the FDA rubber stamped it.
Individuals like Anthony Fauci were effectively in charge of sales and promotion.
And the media did what it has done for so long: it cultivated fear and manipulated the perceptions of those enchanted by a screen of flashing colors and light.
And all the while, the specter was there, ready and waiting.
-
To be continued in Part 2.
Information wants to be free—and over 90% of the content here is accessible to anyone. But everything takes care and time. If you like what you see, and you’re willing and able, consider leaving a tip. Every little bit helps. Thank you!
Emergency Use Authorization has allowed these products to side-step the typical GMP (good manufacturing practices) usually required for drugs. This classification has further enabled a high degree of opacity with regard to surveillance and testing of product batches, lots, and vials, and public access to records of such activities, if they exist. To date, there is no publicly available data for comprehensive lot testing by the manufacturers or regulatory agencies. The public has not been allowed to access any documented evidence which report the constituents for the various lots and vials produced; further, it currently is not known how standardized the vials may or may not be, and to what degree they may deviate from the publicized specifications put forth by the manufacturers. The absence of this data is difficult to interpret as anything but intentional.
This cannot be stressed enough. The COVID-19 injectable products are not ‘vaccines’ and using either term, ‘vaccine’ or ‘vaccinated’, in reference to these genetic prodrugs is misleading and contributes to the ongoing misrepresentation of these products.
Wolff J.A., Lederberg J. An early history of gene transfer and therapy. Hum Gene Ther. 1994;5:469–480. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8049304/
A brilliant and marvelously written commentary!
Looking forward to Part 2!
Thank you…
I strongly suspect that the vast majority of deaths to occur as a result of the jabs, will be seen in the next few years, even if nobody takes another jab.
I fear a massive "die-off" (the reality of what has happened) is still just around the corner.