The so-called Doctor Anthony Fauci, who hasn’t seen patients in more than two decades, has been inconsistent in his own rhetoric concerning the Coronavirus as well as with mainstream “authorities” like the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
Early on in the official beginning of the pandemic last year, he told news anchors that wearing masks might make people feel better, but that they wouldn’t serve any real prophylactic purpose. Those statements are about a year old now, and they are the last thing Fauci has said (intentionally) that we agree with. Indeed, casual mask-wearing has little to no protective effect against viruses and in fact decreases the one thing we need most for a healthy immune system, oxygen. Doubling up on masks can only cut oxygen saturation further, enhancing conditions for tumor growth, cutting cognitive function, and placing a significant energy deficit on immune function.
All that aside, we are always eager to catch Fauci in a slip of the tongue, for if liars can be counted on to do one helpful thing, it’s to misspeak. Recently, the CNN host, John Berman asked Fauci, “What’s the science behind saying it’s not safe for people who have been vaccinated, and received two doses, to travel?”
Before going on, it’s worth pointing out that this is an improper use of the word “science.” Science is never a mandate. It is a method of inquiry into phenomena of the natural world. Science is always subject to change and can only be as good as the integrity of those who engage in it.
Fauci’s response was, “When you don’t have the data and you don’t have the actual evidence, you’ve got to make a judgment call.”
In other words, Fauci is saying that there is no scientific data to support infringing on people’s right to travel. Furthermore, he says that even though the “science” (to use the word incorrectly again), is not sufficient to justify restricting freedom of movement, so-called authorities must do whatever they can to restrict people’s movement anyway.
Let’s just lay this out syllogistically.
Premise 1: Americans are hoping for an end to lockdowns.
Premise 2: Scientific data showing restricting American’s freedom will save lives does not exist.
Premise 3: Fauci claims authorities should restrict American’s freedom anyway.
Conclusion: Fauci advocates curtailing freedom of movement for non-health-related reasons.
This show that the lockdowns are not about health, but about control. It also shows that the vaccine is not fit for purpose. Never before have we offered people vaccinations, promising safety from illness, while at the same time saying that recipients will continue to be a contagion threat.
The vaccine has been marketed to us as a way for Americans to be free of lockdown restrictions. Now that people are getting it, we are hearing that they will still be subjected to restrictions and mask mandates. If history has shown us one thing about government, it’s that once gained, it never lets go of new power.
