It’s been said that, to understand who it is that is REALLY in charge of things behind the scenes, ask who it is that you cannot criticize.
Mouthpieces and talking heads (puppets) like Tony Fauci are allowed to be criticized, we are meant to believe that they are who it is that we need to fight against.
But while The Faucian Bargain was likely a deal made with a devil, perhaps even under duress, that “contract” is ending now — but it is almost a guarantee that similar shenanigans won’t end.
That’s because Fauci wasn’t the top dog.
While receiving exhorbitant personal financial gain from pushing vaccines like Moderna, all while pretending to be a voice of reason and objectivity, Tony Two-Tales — e.g., masks don’t work; masks work; two masks are better than one, etc. — is seeking now to ride off into the sunset.
But it is not safe to go back into the water, because there are even bigger fish in there.
When beloved former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, criticized George Soros for gutting out police departments — presumably to replace lost officers with ideological lackeys and thugs — even commentators at Fox News shut him down.
Soros is what you call a “big fish.”
Death Stats
When presenting statistics on excess deaths in different nations, you can look to see if there is wide disagreement about the estimates of a nation being able to productively respond to the threat of COVID.
If a given nation has low excess death, it may be presumed to get awarded “high marks” in the minds of observers, by being an example of how you protect human life from tragedy under a pandemic threat.
Besides widely differing central estimates of excess death, another tip that a certain nation is being intentionally favored is if the uncertainty interval around the estimate is relatively small.
A tiny uncertainty interval would insinuate that, not only is there really good news for this nation in terms of having low, low death — but also that we can have great reliance on the estimate, because of how much of the uncertainty which had supposedly been removed.
Look at these two competing estimates for excess death in China:
The line at very top is the upper estimate from The Economist on the accumulated excess death in China by the end of May of 2021. Notice how it is much higher than the bold black line — the line showing the total number of confirmed COVID deaths in China by the end of May of 2021.
The bold orange line just below is the central estimate from The Economist, and the light orange line just below that is the lower estimate from The Economist. If you keep going below that, you reach the upper estimate from WHO, then their central estimate right away, then their lower estimate right away.
The interval by The Economist is realistic, and it acknowledges the uncertainty in an honest manner. But the interval by the WHO is unrealistically narrow, and it doesn’t even overlap the wide interval from The Economist.
Here is the same image with a lot of markings on it, indicating that this image is at least strong, circumstantial evidence that the WHO has been captured by China:
Deep Stats
Uncertainty limits, when at 95% confidence, almost always cross each other. When the standard errors are the same, they only cease to overlap each other 6 times in a thousand (p = 0.006). Even when one standard error is twice the other, they only cease to overlap 9 times in a thousand (p=0.009).
Having a string of months in a row, all with the upper bound of the WHO estimate below the lower bound of the estimate by The Economist, indicates bias, and possibly intentional bias.
Getting back to the Litmus Test for discovering who is in charge, how come the WHO estimates for China seem not only overly gracious in terms of the central estimate, but also overly precise?
Did certain bureaucrats “decide” to keep the China excess death estimate so low, and to claim that the margin of error on the estimate really is as small as they say it is?
The narrowness of the WHO interval adds weight to the suspicion that their China estimates are “doctored.”
Reference
[Fox News commentators shut-down criticism of George Soros by a beloved former Speaker of the House] — https://theweek.com/speedreads/938033/newt-gingrich-asks-fox-news-host-now-verboten-criticize-george-soros-earns-long-stare
[probability of non-overlapping confidence intervals] — Table 1. Payton ME, Greenstone MH, Schenker N. Overlapping confidence intervals or standard error intervals: what do they mean in terms of statistical significance? J Insect Sci. 2003;3:34. doi: 10.1093/jis/3.1.34. Epub 2003 Oct 30. PMID: 15841249; PMCID: PMC524673. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC524673/