QC Covid Coalition Presser Oct 27 2020 Video Screenshot

Regarding the worldwide crisis brought about by governments' response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, for nine months the Reader has kept to our mission of providing news and information beyond what is delivered by both local and national corporate media. Alternative information and viewpoints are what we do, and COVID-19 is no exception. In fact, because of its importance to our bio-future and personal freedoms, understanding COVID-related issues deserves as deep a dive as we can muster.

Why Local County Elections Matter

We've written about the importance of the quiet government, the county officers, for years. Most Quad Citizens can't name their county sheriff or a single county supervisor. And that's just fine for them, as they have no readily tangible example of how those offices impact their daily lives. If you don't pay property taxes, interact with the court system, develop property in the unincorporated rural county, or utilize mental-health services, then this indifference is somewhat understandable.

21 Scott County Iowa COVID Deaths March through August 2020 Death Certificate Information

It was a only a matter of time before the scientific evidence relative to the SARS-CoV2 virus and COVID-19 downgrading its lethality overwhelmed the narratives that continue to perpetuate shuttering businesses and schools.

Still No Conclusive Evidence Justifying Mandated Masking

In June, we published Denis Rancourt's white paper titled “Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy.” As of this date, the article has been viewed over 460,000 times world-wide. And, as the Reader's publisher I pledged to publish all letters, guest commentaries, or studies refuting Rancourt's general premise that this mask-wearing culture and shaming could be more harmful than helpful.

This pandemic is waning by all measures that count. Regardless, the public at large remains deeply frightened, submissive, compliant, and disturbingly incurious. Incurious about the onslaught of redundant, irrational, fact-starved messaging recited by “trusted voices,” be they government officials or mainstream-media propagandists.

Covid Controversies Require Critical Thinking

For nearly 27 years, the Reader has provided the Quad Cities with alternative news and perspectives. By “alternative,” I mean alternative to the mainstream media, and this unyielding mission has served the community well. This policy as it applies to COVID-19 is no different, especially due to the vast volumes of information that are being withheld, even censored, from the American public.

It is not necessary for agreement to appreciate information that makes us look at the issues of our time more closely, or differently. The more information, the better, for informed decisions and opinions. The only non-negotiable requirement should be evidence-based reporting, well-sourced and verified, then linked for readers to investigate for themselves. Our mission statement has always been “to make you think, not tell you what to think.”

Landmark Fluoridation Trial on Hold

Search the for the word “fluoride” or “fluoridation” at every broadcast-news-station Web site and the two (for now) daily-newspaper Web sites in the Quad Cities and you will not find one mention of a recent landmark trial over the controversial practice of medicating local water supplies with fluoride under the auspices of topically treating one's teeth through ingestion. It's another example of big pharma's power and influence over the media to not question the status quo.

I am well aware of the stigma associated with questioning the status quo when it comes to matters of health and well being. You may have noticed the Reader has not had any local health-care advertisers for many years. Nor have we ever had any pharmaceutical advertisers, something all mainstream media rely heavily on to stay afloat.

Longtime readers of this publication are well aware that one of the Reader's primary directives is to question authority. There are troves of documentation worldwide that prove our leaders got COVID-19 deadly wrong in numerous areas. If you have not read Reader editor Kathleen McCarthy's extensive analysis of the COVID-19 science and punditry over the last three months, you can get caught up at the following short links: RCReader.com/y/covid19 and RCReader.com/y/covidmay.

The most mystifying phenomena of this COVID-19 pandemic is the public's resistance to a wealth of compelling new data that confirms the SARS-CoV2 virus, claimed by the CDC, NIH, and WHO to be the cause of the disease COVID-19, is not nearly as lethal as originally feared. In fact, the data is showing less than 1/10th of 1 percent (0.01percent) of people who test positive for COVID-19 will actually die, with 90 percent of those people averaging 65 or older and having multiple critical comorbidity conditions.  [UPDATE: The CDC has estimated the lethality to be 0.26%, while detractors disagree.] The percentage of children 12 and under at risk is infinitesimal. So the question should now be: Is COVID-19 worthy of pandemic status, and based on widespread compelling new data, is the extreme global response still justified?

On October 18, 2019, the planners of the 2020 worldwide panic called a Covid-19 pandemic emergency fully mapped out and role-played how all of this fear and economic chaos would arise and what steps global leaders will take. Visit Plannedemic.org to see the World Economic Forum and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded Coronavirus pandemic simulation's own Web site of materials and video recordings. Participants include non-government organizations (NGOs) such as the World Health Organization, the United Nations, global corporations and media, Johns Hopkins University, the World Bank, and both U.S. and China Centers for Disease Control agencies.

Pages