50 Questions to Which We Demand Answers

Fifty Questions to Which We Demand Answers

By: Michael Senger

In the aftermath of the world’s catastrophic response to Covid-19, some governments have begun conducting inquiries into what went wrong. Yet owing to a combination of politics, face-saving, and outright corruption, these inquiries have generally been toothless. For example, a report published last year by the UK House of Commons concluded, backwardly, that if the UK had gone into strict lockdown three days sooner, disaster would have been averted.

Conclusions like these are as insulting to the public’s intelligence as was the response to Covid itself. The response to Covid led to the sharpest economic collapse since the Great Depression, global famine, a mental health crisis, runaway inflation, a transfer of over $3 trillion from the world’s poorest to the very richest, the premature deaths of hundreds of thousands of young people, and the worst education crisis since the Second World War.

Given the magnitude of the harm that’s been done, the public deserves to know exactly who knew and did what, when, and why in the days leading up to the lockdowns of spring 2020 and beyond. Though it may not be politically feasible, ideally this would one day take the form of an international tribunal. Below are just some of the many disturbing questions to which any leader who claims to represent the public ought to demand answers:

1. Why did the CDC suddenly adopt “measures to increase social distance” as official policy in 2004, contrary to all the epidemiological guidance it had developed throughout the 20th century?
2. Who was behind the campaign to export the concept of “lockdown” to Liberia and Sierra Leone in 2014?
3. Some intelligence reports have indicated that members of the Western national security community were aware a new virus had emerged in China by fall 2019. What was being said about the virus at that time?
4. If some national security officials had been worrying about a new virus in China since fall 2019, how could they have possibly believed China’s two-month lockdown of Wuhan eliminated the virus several months later?
5. By January 2020, tips began to emerge that the World Health Organization was planning to recreate China’s lockdowns across the world, starting in Italy. When and on what basis did the World Health Organization make this decision?
6. Lockdowns had been ruled out by the pandemic plans of the WHO and every developed nation. Why weren’t these pandemic plans followed?
7. Why were health security officials talking about “curfews of indefinite duration” by February 24, 2020?
8. Why does the WHO’s February 2020 report rely on logical fallacies in its promulgation of China’s lockdown measures as global policy?
9. Why was the current Director of National Intelligence sitting next to China’s CDC director at the Event 201 simulation of a coronavirus pandemic in October 2019, shortly before a real coronavirus pandemic emerged?
10. Former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Deborah Birx has made conflicting statements about how she got her job. For example, the former Deputy National Security Advisor offered her a job in the White House as public health security advisor as far back as November 2019. How was Birx chosen for this role?
11. Who was behind the terror campaign of fake videos showing Wuhan residents spontaneously dying and convulsing in the streets in January and February 2020?
12. Why is there no record of the hero doctor Li Wenliang before he appeared in Chinese state media at the end of January 2020? On what basis did Western media outlets adopt this story as true?
13. High-level members of the national security community including the former Director of National Intelligence and the former Secretary of State have stated as fact that Covid came from a lab in Wuhan. At the same time, high-level scientific officials including NIAID Director Anthony Fauci have stated that it is “molecularly impossible” for Covid to have come from that lab. How can we still have this disconnect at the highest levels of the federal government?
14. A report revealed that military leaders saw Covid as a unique opportunity to test propaganda techniques on the public. Who advised Western leaders to use military-grade propaganda on their own people?
15. Some officials in the UK later expressed contrition about the fear campaigns that the UK Government used on its own people to convince them to support Covid mandates. How was the decision to use these fear campaigns made?
16. Who was behind the massive bot and astroturf campaigns to popularize lockdowns among Western citizens and officials in March 2020?
17. What was the origin of international slogans such as “follow the science,” “together apart,” “just stay home,” and “two weeks to slow the spread” which were used to drive support for Covid mandates? 
18. How many people were killed by the WHO’s initial guidance on mechanical ventilators based on Chinese journal articles advising ventilators as the “first choice” for those hospitalized with Covid?
19. The initial guidance from the WHO advised using mechanical ventilators not necessarily for the patient’s benefit, but to control the spread of the virus. Why was the WHO advising doctors to violate the Hippocratic Oath?
20. Why were numerous, credible predictions of famine, human rights disasters, and economic collapse as a result of lockdowns ignored?
21. Why was natural immunity so long ignored?
22. Why were initial seroprevalence studies downplayed?
23. Why were beaches and other outdoor spaces closed?
24. Why was the public kept in the dark about low early estimates of Covid’s actual infection fatality rate?
25. What was the source of the guidance to move patients who were still sick into nursing homes?
26. Remdesivir and midazolam were initially widely used, but didn’t lead to positive health outcomes. How was the decision made to use these over other treatment protocols?
27. Leading officials have made conflicting statements as to whether the goal of lockdowns was to eliminate the virus, slow the spread, or buy time for vaccines. What was the actual goal they had in mind at the time they implemented these policies?
28. Why did key public health officials make statements about using the response to Covid to advance non-health-related policy goals?
29. How was the decision made to suppress and censor scientific opinions that dissented from lockdowns?
30. Why were so many federal officials so intimately involved in the censorship of dissenting opinions on social media?
31. Why did elite Western newspapers, media networks, and public health leaders so diligently repeat the absurd line that China had eliminated Covid by shutting down one city for two months?
32. Why did elite Western publications begin explicitly urging the public to adopt a response to Covid that was more like China’s?
33. Why were mechanical drones initially deployed by various states and countries to monitor lockdown compliance?
34. What accounted for the close international synchronization of Covid mandates?
35. Why did masks shift from being not advised to being mandatory?
36. The New York Times confirmed that at the standard cycle threshold level used for PCR testing, 85 to 90 percent of Covid cases were false positives. How did this practice become standard?
37. Why were widely-known and publicized problems with PCR testing and comorbidities ignored for purposes of counting Covid deaths?
38. Why did key public health officials so quickly shift from saying vaccines would prevent Covid to saying proof of vaccination should be mandatory to partake in everyday activities?
39. Why has there been so little public discussion of China’s influence on the global response to Covid, despite FBI Director Christopher Wray’s disclosure that Chinese officials were “aggressively urging support for China’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis?”
40. Why was the UK Government so deferential to Neil Ferguson and Imperial College London during the response to Covid despite Imperial’s close relationship with China?
41. Why has the editor-in-chief of the Lancet been so publicly deferential to China?
42. Why did Bill Gates express such admiration for China’s response to Covid?
43. Why did the German government privately disseminate a list of authoritarian measures provided in part by China lobbyists?
44. How did a 40-year member of the British Communist Party with no background in epidemiology become a leading advisor to the UK Government, and why was she recently promoted to lead the WHO’s nudge unit?
45. Why did leading economists assume that a short, sharp lockdown would “eliminate the resurgence risk” when the policy had no precedent?
46. Why did the Federal Reserve and its international counterparts disregard inflation?
47. Why did the Supreme Court and its international counterparts step aside while lockdowns were being implemented?
48. Why did the judiciary acquiesce to an indefinite state of legal emergency?
49. Why did Western politicians and public health officials demonstrate so little concern for following their own Covid rules?
50. If the virus was deadly enough to kill millions and justify an indefinite state of emergency, why has so little effort been expended to hold China accountable for its initial coverup of that virus?

Though many in positions of power would prefer that we forgot, the strict lockdowns that consumed the world in 2020 are extremely well documented. Above all, these lockdowns were a chilling demonstration of just how quickly Western officials, policymakers, scientists, journalists, and soon entire populations could be convinced to adopt a degree of totalitarianism in their everyday lives. Until we have real answers as to how exactly they happened, and why, there’s no reason for any thinking citizen to have confidence in the current crop of officials who claim to represent them.

••••

The above article (Disinformation, Censorship, and Information Warfare in the 21st Century) was published on the site BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE and is republished here with permission and attribution to the articles author Michael Senger and brownstone.org. The above article originated on the author’s Substack

About the above articles Author: Michael P Senger is an attorney and author of Snake Oil: How Xi Jinping Shut Down the World. He has been researching the influence of the Chinese Communist Party on the world’s response to COVID-19 since March 2020 and previously authored China’s Global Lockdown Propaganda Campaign and The Masked Ball of Cowardice in Tablet Magazine. You can follow his work on Substack

Image Credit: Photo in articles Featured Image (top) – pixabay license

••••

Also by the Author:

Disinformation, Censorship & Information Warfare In The 21st Century

••••

Checkout TLBTalk.com:

Click Here to Visit the TLBTalk.com Site

TLBTalk – Republic Broadcasting Network – The Liberty Beacon – The Butcher Shop

••••

Stay tuned to …

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.