Same Facts, Opposite Conclusions – #PropagandaWatch

by | Nov 4, 2020 | Propaganda Watch | 35 comments

So how do you start from the same facts and arrive at exactly opposite conclusions? Let’s find out as we delve into a recent report about lockdown-related deaths from The Sunday Times.

Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

Simon Dolan tweet

Lockdown legal challenge against UK goverenment

Revealed: how elderly paid price of protecting NHS from Covid-19

80% of NYC’s coronavirus patients who are put on ventilators ultimately die, and some doctors are trying to stop using them

From Bioethics to Eugenics

The truth about lockdowns

Stats Hold a Surprise: Lockdowns May Have Had Little Effect on COVID-19 Spread

The Failed Experiment of Covid Lockdowns

Decreased Influenza Activity During the COVID-19 Pandemic โ€” United States, Australia, Chile, and South Africa, 2020

Mises’s Non-Trivial Insight (Praxeology vs Pragmatism)

#PropagandaWatch rss feed


  1. I’m in SoCal in the San Fernando Valley of LA. Just this last weekend, I saw HUNDREDS of humvees (military hummers) at a parking lot near the Lake Balboa golf course (that weren’t there earlier this summer), and I wouldn’t be surprised if cities across the US and around the world have the same.

    Keep your heads up people!

    • I am currently living in the central valley, just north of you. Two days ago when I was driving to work I looked up and saw on the highway overpass, a train transporting military tanks (and other seemingly unrelated cargo) northbound. When I saw that I thought it was a bit odd, but there are several military bases in California and my region generally.

  2. Testing, that’s where it’s all at. Testing needs to be undermined as much as possible, that is the source of all the data and psycho logic.

    • Yup, mkey I agree. Hey James, I was waiting for the other side of the story that the lock downs and other draconian measures “likely” lowered viral and flue infections stats for the same time period. As the RPC testing will give a positive for a number of strains of flue, corona and H1N1. Is it possible that the positives were all called covid19 when in fact they were one of the other possibilities? Subtract that from the Covid case stats and we would get a clearer look at the “Pandemic” and also this “second wave”. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • If the testing stopped it would be bye bye covid19 which is of course why they won’t do it.

      • I’m not talking about stopping testing. I want to see PCR “test” diffused completely so that it can’t be abused again. To disseminate information on how it works means to completely diffuse its weaponized properties.


        Del Bigtree didn’t go deep enough, but still a step in the right direction.

  3. Ah the good ole “We gotta get em’ over there so we don’t get attacked here” argument. Smh, So many parallels with the phony war on terror narrative.

  4. Seems to be getting embroiled in straw man arguments…

    On March 20th the UK government removed Covid-19 from the list of high consequene infectious diseases, stating truthfully that it is of low consequence and would have a low death rate. (The high consequence diseases are things like Ebola and Rocky Mountain Haemorrhagic fever which in any epidemic could kill big chunks of the population.) This reclassification to “Low Consequence” happened just before the lockdown legislation was pushed through parliament.

    The lockdown legislation was introduced for two stated reasons: To support the NHS, to protect the vulnerable. The NHS had declared a level 4 emergency anticipating overwhelm (not necessarily an actual overwhelm) The vulnerable were stated to be the elderly and infirm.
    The government still quotes these asinine pretexts as justification and nowadays plays with faked-up statistics and the bogeyman R number..

    The UK government as the mother of all parliaments that other countries of the Commonwealth of Nations model themselves on, during late March communicated directly to the other governments directing them to do similar, and reported these actions in their published daily news bulletin.. Then on YouTube I witnessed one person declaring herself to be a Rhodes Scholar as her qualification for giving directions, which told me immediately that this is a global elite operation.

    That countries around the world comply to impose lockdowns is no democratic process at all but is deferring to hidden world authority that began to be set up with the Oxford roundtable in 1890 and now has many offshoot influence groups (including the WHO, UN agencies, Bilderberg, Club of Rome and many others). To become a Rhodes Scholar or anybody of influence you have to early on declare support for a single world government, and show high ability, and once in and trained you can then get fast-tracked to be a party leader (meaning all political party leaders in all countries of the Commonwealth..)

    Worth stating here that the roundtable set up in 1890 was the brainchild of HRH later HM King Edward VII and converting the colonies into faked-up democracies where all parties answered to the same hidden control was/is a way to hide the Sovereign’s influence, preserve and expand the British Empire and increase the level of control. The late Queen Victoria had survived 6 assassination attempts..

    Whereas the Queen is the head of the Commonwealth of Nations, her consort Prince Philip is the head of the European Royal families. The UK Prime Minister reports to the reigning Sovereign every day, and it is nowadays popularly supposed that she is a mere figurehead.

    The Royal Family are players in the global elite, but they are not the only ones, and are not necessarily the top of the heap.

    Just so you know..

    • > The lockdown legislation was introduced for two stated reasons: To support the NHS, to protect the vulnerable.
      In every country that has a socialized healthcare system, the supposed overwhelming of the hospitals was one of the main pretexts to impose lockdowns.
      The tactic is always the same, the government invents a new right, makes you have a harder time to have access to the service that was elevated to a right and ends up using that made-up right as an excuse to infringe on every right you have.
      Even before the fraudemic, it was clear that socialized healthcare is the prime example of this.

      • “…socialized healthcare…”

        What a meaningless construct, but if you come from certain belief system you might find some meaning, no matter how poor explanatory power of the construct is.

        Today we basically have two varieties of healthcare system (and mixtures): one based on Solidarity the other on Individualized health insurance.

        Before entering discussion we have to be aware of a fact, maybe I can say axiom:

        No one have foreknowledge about his health fortune.

        Insurance based might be preferable for rich people who can afford high premiums. Some well standing will also be attracted by this system, but since the highest premiums are out of reach for them they will end with to low caps for eventual future medical conditions.

        Solidarity based systems should logically be preferable to most of the people. No one wants to be in dire need of medical help, but it’s good to have everything possible if in need.

        Yeea, nowadays is prevailing who will pay, I won’t pay for useless eaters, danglers. All healthcare is in problems one way or the other.
        It’s amazing how the main culprits are so well hidden from public scrutiny and they are: monopolistic dogmatic medicine, pharma corporations, health insurance. The problem is not on the demand side, it’s on supply side.
        Probably you heard about price-gauging of pharmaceuticals, an oxymoron for market economy(capitalism), there were few cases, but only in conjunction with pharmaceuticals, I don’t know any case elsewhere.
        The whole medical industry is price-gauging over the top, but they can’t be called out using supposedly oxymoronic arguments.

  5. Excelent video James.

    We are dealing with a cult, we may show whatever data we want and it still won’t change their “opinion”.

    Scientism has one dogma
    the infallibility of the experts, in contrast with papal infallibility however, it is not limited in scope. The experts anointed by the msm and the global stakeholders are infallible in matters such as laws of nature, laws of human behaviour and morals.
    And when the experts reach a consensus, that consensus is to be believed by all the faithful and infidels alike until another consensus is reached.
    The present consensus is always to be held as a fact, however scientistic infallibility is not immutable.
    If a present consensus contradicts a previous consensus, it doesn’t contradict the infallibility dogma because scientistic infallibity only applies to the present moment when science hasn’t ever been as advanced and therefore that previous consensus was never really a consensus to begin with.

    • Aka “sacred science”. See Lifton’s Criteria that are used to determine whether brainwashing is in use. You can say it is brainwashing if all 8 criteria apply.

  6. Thanks for this simple but eye opening analysis, which pinned down the problem very nicely.

    I think the instigators of this multifaceted layered ‘event’ were (are) smarter (in this respect anyway) than we/I thought.

    They created a story, starting with the horror videos freely coming out of China via the internet. This created fear. Trump, Obama, Bush, … already had created division among the people.

    On a solid rock of fear, every aspect of the corona ‘event’ has been politicized. Hijacked/sponsored ‘social movements’ and riots have been used to deepen the divide.

    This made almost all real or misinterpreted facts a matter of belief.

    I see there is no reasoning with people who swallowed ‘the official narrative’ even if you go down to the basics (e.g., The Truth about Lockdowns). Just as I wouldn’t buy the test case = morbidity narrative either (of course I know more and I am right! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    But seriously, the situation is dire. It’s like 2 bubbles growing bigger and bigger until they explode whenever they touch.

    I cling to optimism and hope. What else can you do?

  7. You’ve summed it all up perfectly. Propaganda 101. It’s like climate alarmists. Tornado? Climate change. Still? Climate change.
    Blizzard? Climate change.
    Heatwave? Climate change. Hey YouTube are making it harder and harder to find / make comments too.

    • The climate change thing was emotional for me. I used to be a staunch believer in man-made climate change, that it was an indisputable fact and what got me was the emotional aspect of it. The starving polar bear broke my heart. But I learned that was propaganda. I also learned there are scientists who challenge the climate change narrative.

      Not saying we know exactly how everything works or that human pollution isn’t a factor, but the carbon narrative is highly questionable now. Especially now that I know about the geoengineering going on. Who knows what that is doing to the climate.

  8. So, if not by data, how are those who support lockdown and government control supposed to see the light? The first question I would ask is: why did they swallow the narrative in the first place? I think this comes down to human psychology. They believe it for the same reasons they believe claims made by other authority figures.

    Is that the reason then? This boils down to people not thinking critically and just trusting the authorities who tell them the lockdowns are necessary? It would seem that way, but like anything there are probably a lot of other variables at play.

    So if that is true, why do they trust authority figures on these issues? Is it from the obedience training taught by schools, parenting, and society in general? Is it films like Contagion and other Hollywood movies that subtly seed the ideas of trusting authorities to handle a disaster?

    I think all of these things are contributing factors. People believe things for reasons they are not even aware of. The chronic, subtle, exposure to certain narratives, ideas, traditions, and societal customs can seep into consciousness and affect what people believe and how they act.

    • Very astute observation here. People are not looking at the evidence with their mind, but with their emotions and the desire to conform. Additionally, some people are germaphobes, it’s instinctual or some kind of OCD (just my observation).

      That is how we must change opinions, not only by facts. JC had a podcast years ago “logic is not enough”.

      The way we are living now with germaphobia and fear is not real life. It’s not how humans or any living being is supposed to live. I hate this with every fiber of my being.

      • Yes, I hate it too, cu.h.j.

        I’ve been ruminating on this since the beginning, and it feels like many people’s reactions to this event are ‘built in’ and visceral. As if they aren’t quite thinking through the situation and are being pulled along by deep instincts. And you make a great point about certain people being germaphobes, or have some other OCD-type behaviors and so the idea of a dangerous, globally spreading virus just ignites their neurosis and confirms and validates their previous suspicions.

    • Ya’ll bring up some good points about swallowing the narrative in the first place.

      Sometimes, it is beyond me that many people refuse to view, study and ponder over information of substance. Weigh the data, not rely on status quo and authority.

      It seems almost like an inability. They don’t have the ability. They just can’t do it.
      It is like telling a person to do 10 pull-ups on the overhead bar.
      They can’t do one. They just are not able to.

      Fluoride – In Dallas for 6 years and over 100 presentations to the Dallas City Council, with tons of science studies and visuals and one-to-one interactions, for the most part, these elected officials have responded with yawns and “no interest”.

      I also see it with some friends and family. If it goes against the status quo, there is the inability to think beyond it.

      • Floride is interesting, seems to be toxic stuff, and may indeed affect the brains of people so they can’t think or are docile and don’t act.

        I think a lot of it is about psychological manipulation of the masses, the desire to believe a certain narrative regardless of the evidence if it is deemed dangerous by the unconscious mind. Also, the media and social media presenting many dramatic images that stir emotions have an effect I think.

        Also, the tendency to listen to authority regardless of what one’s own mind is telling them. Some people can’t or won’t question authority even if they know it’s wrong not to.

      • I think someone on these boards mentioned a study done on students that asserted some 40% of participants don’t know what the inner voice is. Talk about unthinking masses.

  9. Yep.

    Problem. Reaction. Solution.

  10. Here is another example where the narrative follows the underlying dogmatic premises, no matter of the two (potentially opposite) outcomes:

    Our universal use of unscientific face coverings is therefore closer to medieval superstition than it is to science, but many powerful institutions have too much political capital invested in the mask narrative at this point, so the dogma is perpetuated. *The narrative says that if cases go down itโ€™s because masks succeeded. It says that if cases go up itโ€™s because masks succeeded in preventing more cases.* The narrative simply assumes rather than proves that masks work, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.

    • Great example! …which correlates well with this week’s #PropagandaWatch.

  11. “…we need to reassess the future of gain-of-function research that allows for the weaponization of viruses”.

    Exactly, that’s the most unspoken thing in ‘rona hysteria.

    Don’t take the following literally, it’s just vivid representation of my attitude.
    Those engaged in gain-of-function research (not pipette handlers) should be chopped to pieces and fed to stray dogs.

  12. The daughter of a friend of mine in Britain is a nurse/practioner which is midway between a doctor and a nurse or as she says they do what doctors do for half the money. She had completed a training course in March but wasn’t due to take up a new post until July so she was due to work for three months in a large hospital in a very populous area of London where she had previously worked. This would have been for April, May and June. However she was told that she wouldn’t be needed. She told them that should that situation change to contact her and she would go and help them out. She was never contacted. So much for hospitals being overwhelmed and not being to cope because of this pandemic which closed down the country and most businesses.

  13. Absolutely. If people want to lock themselves away and want to wear masks, as foolish as those things are, let them do it but people should be free to make their own decisions.I really resent being told what to do, which actually goes against the evidence anyway, by people I didn’t vote for, have no respect for and who barely seem to have two brain cells to rub together. They impose ridiculous measures by the use of force, fines and threatened jail sentences which are far in excess of the potential risk even going by the official figures which I don’t believe anyway.

  14. You can always say “it would be worse”. There is a good anecdote. One man is sprinkling salt on the road. Another man walking by asks him in curiosity:
    “Man, why are you doing this?”
    “Against crocodiles”
    “But there are no crocodiles here!”
    “Of course, there are no. Thats because I have sprinkled salt all around”

  15. As a resident of Minnesota, I hear EVERY SINGLE YEAR… “this is the year” .. the Vikings are going to the Stupid Bowl. Every year people buy it, buy it , and buy it again. Just like the election.

    Is this a character issue or purely biological psychology..? Both, just like a real virus, a lie inhabits its host and alters their cells\mind. Yes, Sars-Cov-2 is a real virus, it’s DNA is simply a lie.

    • ” I hear EVERY SINGLE YEARโ€ฆ…the Vikings are going to the Stupid Bowl. Every year people buy it, buy it , and buy it again. Just like the election.

      That’s funny.

  16. 9:20 I very much remember that pandata guy (Nick Hudson)
    pondering that exact epistemological question in the Q&A session of a presentation – I just sadly do not remember which video it was
    Neil Ferguson (“evidence then create some wild theory”) vs pandata (“create some reasonable theory and check if it is valid against the evidence”)

    apparently they have now been on Tom Woods too, gonna listen there for more

      Nick Hudson repeats here the points about the underlying philosophical approach at the Tom Woods Show

      these guys just make things up
      with parameters sucked out of the sky

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member