11 thoughts on “TIDBIT: THE CONCLUSION OF THE THREE PART THERANOS ARTICLE”

  1. Loxie Lou Davie

    When all “this” first started, I was at my dentist’s office & he was very confused & stated, “The CDC has let us down on this one!” The one thing this Grandma has taken away from what has transpired is that neither the WHO, nor the CDC can ever be trusted again.

    People of my generation were brainwashed into thinking that the Gov’t would never do anything to hurt us!! (Big laugh here!) We were taught to Trust The Authorities…..with so many reports of people have adverse effects & even dying, we need to wake up & start doing our own research to figure out what is REALLY going on!! It seems The Terrain Theory is the more correct approach!!

  2. “But for some mysterious reason, Murdoch, who had only recently invested $125 million into Theranos, refused to kill Carreyrou’s story even though Holmes had twice implored him personally to do that.”

    Isn’t that important? What is the mysterious? Could “only $125 Mio” mean anything else than he first being part of the conspiracy? But then joined another player or deep state fraction instead? Doesn’t he own Fox News?

    Without that, it would have been much more difficult, and maybe that’s another strategic lesson: we might need some strong player’s support, otherwise we might get sacrified between the lines…

  3. anakephalaiosis

    A HD micro scanner, capable of taking snapshots of Philip the Virus, and placing Alex Jones’ sperm count on YouTube, would be a nightmare for the powers-that-be.

    1. All I see is a wordsmith.

      Lets examine “In this time of crisis, we face two particularly important choices. The first is between totalitarian surveillance and citizen empowerment. The second is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity. ”

      His first proposition totalitarian surveillance vs citizen empowerment. To me they seem synonyms to appear as opposites because to be an empowered citizen you have to be a free willed person.

      Second proposition are nationalist isolation vs global solidarity. To me they belong to the same coin that can’t be seperated but you do need a free willed person to navigate between them.

      Isn’t it strange that in his whole article the importaz”free willed persons” never comes up? No, we need trustworthy global arrangements so we can trust or leaders, scientists and technology again.

    2. Can you explain why do you consider this article a “must read”?

      The only thing I can take out of it is to confirm my mistrust against the author, if nothing else, by the mere fact that he would be published on ft.

      On a quick overlook, I could mostly find mainstream propaganda near to transhumanism wrapped in simplistic arguments, no real doubt that our current western “democracies” are rotten to the core, no doubt about the scamdemic narrative etc.

Leave a Comment