The Crazy Covid Nobel Prize By James Reed
It seems that the Nobel Peace Prize Committee are moving to give the dusty award to the World Health Organization, for something it was supposed to have done with the Covid plandemic. It is a continuation of the mentality that gave a past Peace Prize to Hussein Obama for being multiracial, and Bob Dylan, for not being able to sing, well, not as good as Lee Marvin (I was Born Under a Wandering Star (1969)), but whose music delivered some woke poems. But, all credit for everything (wrong) that the WHO is to get credit from comes from good old communist Chinese dictator, Xi Jinping.
“According to odds placed by bookmakers, the World Health Organization is a current frontrunner to win this year’s Nobel Peace Prize for its efforts in the fight against Covid-19. But this would be a terrible mistake by the Nobel Committee, upon whom it is incumbent to ensure credit is given where it’s due. In fact, as had been meticulously recorded for posterity in Snake Oil: How Xi Jinping Shut Down the World, virtually every policy the WHO implemented in response to Covid—from the lockdowns and ventilators to the mass testing and vaccine passes—was actually taken from the mind of a far more deserving candidate: Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party.
As reported by the New York Times, Xi personally oversaw the “unprecedented lockdown of Wuhan and other cities” in January 2020, which the WHO agreed was “new to science” and “unprecedented in public health history.” Days later, WHO Director Tedros Adhanom personally praised Xi’s unprecedented lockdown, long before it achieved any “results.”
Weeks later, the WHO’s Assistant Director-General Bruce Aylward reported back from Beijing, ignoring several glaring logical fallacies in order to rubber stamp Xi’s lockdowns into global “public health” policy.
It may be tempting to give the WHO credit for its guidance on mechanical ventilators which, in the early months of the crisis, killed thousands of patients, resulting in a 97.2% mortality rate among those over age 65 before a grassroots campaign put a stop to the practice. But upon examining the WHO’s guidance, it’s again clear that the WHO took this advice straight from Chinese journal articles which stated that “Chinese expert consensus” called for “invasive mechanical ventilation” as the “first choice” for people with respiratory distress—in part to protect medical staff.
Now before I go further, I know what everyone’s thinking. What about the WHO’s elaborate plans for a worldwide digital vaccine pass system, conditioning the fundamental rights of billions of people on their consent to the latest injections decreed by the WHO? Surely such a boldly dystopian and unprecedented global power grab is a Nobel-worthy feat? But alas, this too was cribbed from a policy that Xi Jinping had already unrolled within China over a year prior.
Unfortunately, the same goes for the WHO’s advice on mass testing based on “asymptomatic spread,” creating the illusion of a permanent pandemic. The WHO makes clear that this concept of widespread Covid asymptomatic spread was based on early data from China which could not be recreated in other countries.
Likewise, upon further examination of the WHO’s guidance on mass PCR testing for Covid, this too relied on Chinese journal articles, each of which advised the use of 37 to 40 cycle thresholds for PCR testing, this becoming the global standard pursuant to which over 85% of cases were false positives, as later confirmed by the New York Times.
Ultimately, the lockdowns and other mandates implemented in response to Covid-19 failed to stop the virus—which was subsequently proven to have an infection fatality rate under 0.2% and to have begun spreading undetected all over the world by mid-2019 at the latest—in every country in which they were tried.
However, they did lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of young people, the largest man-made famine since the Great Leap Forward, an unprecedented mental health crisis, years of lost education for millions of children, decades of lost progress in the global fight for human rights, and an indefinite state of emergency that continues to this day.
Some believe this is a feat worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize. I, not-so-respectfully, disagree. However, one point we can all agree on is that credit for these policies should be given to the man whom we truly have to thank for their conception: Xi Jinping.
Though Xi is far too humble to hog the spotlight in this area, it would be a terrible tragedy, potentially staining the Nobel Committee’s reputation for decades to come, if Xi’s breakthroughs in the burgeoning field of global public health tyranny were passed over for the derivative and unoriginal work of the WHO.”
Comments