Re. the Rancourt interview, I agree with you that the lingering question is were the excess deaths intentional? Rancourt doesn’t seem to go that far, and I don’t, either. My mind keeps going back to an interview with the late Michael Crichton when he went on a speaking tour re. how our park services have been handling our national parks for more than a century. He said it’s been a disaster, caused by what he called “religious thinking.” He said it’s not based on history, nor science, and it should be based on both. Instead, it’s based on an ironically Christian framework (since our park services would scoff at that notion) that there once was a kind of “Eden” in nature, and that white men with our industrialization came along and “cast it out of paradise,” and so the task of our park policies is to do the opposite of that, and that will return the parks to their natural state. He said just the opposite has happened. They do not resemble what they once were before park management came along, because their methods are not based on observation. Their methods are not allowed to be subjected to critical analysis. It’s based on a kind of faith, with no evidence. What this demonstrates to me is that it’s possible for group-think to shut out the evidence, and to just plow ahead with a belief system, even though thousands of lives are being ended by the actions taken. That’s a generous way of looking at it, that it’s all a big mistake. I think that possibility should be entertained, but I also think that the possibility of a malignant desire to kill off some of our population should also be considered, because the effects of the policies were severe enough that if someone wanted to do that, while getting away with it, this is how you’d do it.

The track record of the Covid shots points in a malignant direction, given what we now know from the Pfizer papers.