Rabbis Want Yeshivos and Schools Open

Two of the most senior ultra-Orthodox rabbis in Israel on Tuesday published a joint statement in which they warned that if the government fails to soon find a way to relax coronavirus restrictions and reopen yeshivas, they will consider taking “drastic steps.”

[see below about testing]

[. . .] The *warning comes following several sometimes violent demonstrations among Haredi communities against the coronavirus restrictions that saw synagogues, schools and yeshivas closed and prayer quorums banned. There has also been widespread anger after strict closures were imposed on the mainly ultra-Orthodox city of Bnei Brak and Jerusalem neighborhoods, which were the worst affected by the virus.


Under the latest guidelines Jerusalem and Bnei Brak residents will now be under the same restrictions as the rest of the country, which keep them within 100 meters of their homes, with exceptions for purchasing food and supplies, exercising and going to work. People are also allowed to go 500 meters beyond their own homes or workplaces for prayer.

I’m coming to the conclusion that there is NO REASON to keep Yeshivos and Schools closed.  The more they test it is obvious that they will find more people that have or had the virus. Most people do not die, they suffer very similarly to how they suffer with the flu.
Allowing “Natural Herd Immunity” is the only way to stop the virus, while keeping the most vulnerable isolated at their home (and not in “hotels”).  Once Herd Immunity is achieved, the big question is what will happen to the “most vulnerable” once they venture out into society?

The conspiracy theories are very much alive and well.

TESTING POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE?
IS THE FOLLOWING WHY THE TESTING RESULTS OF “POSITIVE" FOUND 
IN RELIGIOUS NEIGHBORHOODS IS ALWAYS SO HIGH?

Lab numbers can be manipulated to increase “positive” or “negative”.
[the following is excerpted from a very long article, to catch the point]

[. . .] “What is the relationship between the spread of testing and the “spread” of a new virus? How do we know what we are experiencing, in comparison to what we are assuming we are experiencing? One study in Austria found that increased testing correlated with, no surprise, increased “cases.”

“In an email discussion between a group of international scientists, academics and MD’s, the question was posed whether the daily number of new cases would track with the daily number of tests.

“Yes, they do,” wrote Austrian MD Christian Fiala. “Here are the data from Austria. In other words if they want to further increase the number of ‘infected‘ people, they have to also increase the number of tests. However, that is physically impossible.[...]

[The following excerpt is from an interview *article uncoverdc.com with a scientist:]

“We used to joke that you could rid yourself of an "HIV diagnosis" by flying from either the US or Australia, to Africa. But for many years, "AIDS" in Africa was diagnosed without any tests whatsoever. Just a short list of symptoms that tracked precisely with symptoms of most tropical diseases, such as fever, cough, and shortness of breath. [sound familiar?]

“David, in his quiet Canadian way, dropped a bombshell in his next statement:

"I think if a country said, "You know, we need to end this epidemic," They could quietly send around a memo saying: "We shouldn't be having the cutoff at 37. If we put it at 32, the number of positive tests drops dramatically. If it's still not enough, well, you know, 30 or 28 or something like that. So, you can control the sensitivity."

“Yes, you read that right. Labs can manipulate how many "cases' of Covid-19 their country has. Is this how the Chinese made their case load vanish all of a sudden?

"Another reason we know this is bogus," Crowe continued, "is from a remarkable series of graphs published by some people from Singapore in JAMA. These graphs were published in the supplementary information, which is an indication that nobody's supposed to read them. And I think the authors probably just threw them in because they were interesting graphs, but they didn't realize what was in them. So, they were 18 graphs of 18 different people. And at this hospital in Singapore, they did daily coronavirus tests and they grasped the number of PCR cycles necessary to detect fluorescence. Or if they couldn't detect florescence by…37 cycles, they put a dot on the bottom of the graph, signifying a negative."

"So, in this group of 18 people, the majority of people went from positive, which is normally read as "infected," to negative, which is normally read as "uninfected" back to positive–infected again. So how do you interpret this? How do you have a test if a test act is actually, you know, 100% positive for detecting infection, then the negative results must've been wrong? And so, one way to solve that is to move the point from 37 to say 36 or 38. You can move this, this cycle of numbers. It's an arbitrary division up or down. But there's no guarantee that if you did that, you wouldn't still have the same thing. It would just, instead of going from, from 36 to undetectable and back to 36 or back to 45, it might go from 33 to undetectable to 30 or something like that. Right? So, you can't solve the problem by changing this arbitrary binary division. And so basically this says that the test is NOT detecting infection.

Because if it was, like if you're infected, and then you're uninfected, and you're in a hospital with the best anti-infective precautions in the world, how did you get re-infected? And if you cured the infection, why didn't you have antibodies to stop you getting re-infected? So, there's no explanation within the mainstream that can explain these results. That's why I think they're so important."

“I couldn't believe my ears. And yet I could. Have you ever tried to read the package insert for a "Corona" PCR test? You begin to feel after a while that the technobabble is some kind of spell, or bad dream. An alien language from another dimension, that could not possibly-whatever else it may do-help a single human being have a better life. It's not "English." I don't know what it is. [...]

To read the full very long but very interesting article, visit link above.
* the title of which is:
“The Corona Simulation Machine: Why the Inventor of The “Corona Test” Would Have Warned Us Not To Use It To Detect A Virus“

..........................

**This in no way is intended to imply that this plandemic is not making some people very ill.