It recently occured to me, after reading this thread, that I may have been thinking about the smears of Ivermectin a bit too generously.

Obviously they don't want their narrative to collapse, they want the lockdowns to continue, they want the third/fourth/fifth jab rollouts, and they want the vaxx passports (to branch into social credit scores, and to try to push us out of society). Ivermectin puts a stop to all of this.

I've been assuming that any deaths they cause in the meantime, from their perspective, is an added bonus. Not the intended goal of their short-to-midterm plans.

With that said, they want de-pop, either by the jabs and/or at a later time by other means (which of these would become obvious with time, provided their plans aren't stopped).

There is an argument for why significant depop-by-jab isn't a good route for them to go down, yet, given they don't have full control yet and it has the potential to awaken the population against them before they can achieve their goals.

Given that Ivermectin would significantly reduce the rate of ADE amongst our jabbed population, it was thus reduce the rate of death and severe injury amongst our people.

These deaths, if allowed to occur (via the continued supression of Ivermectin and other treatments), would be spun as being the fault of the unvaxxed, for "producing the variants", and used as the "justification" for vaxx passports and further booster shots.

So perhaps there is another reason for the smears of Ivermectin. Perhaps they do want many of our vaxxed people to die, sooner-rather-than-later, to advance their current goals (i.e., they're timeline is being rushed).

It recently occured to me, after reading this thread, that I may have been thinking about the smears of Ivermectin a bit too generously.

Obviously they don't want their narrative to collapse, they want the lockdowns, to continue, they want the third/fourth/fifth jab rollouts, and they want the vaxx passports (to branch into social credit scores, and to try to push us out of society). Ivermectin puts a stop to all of this.

I've been assuming that any deaths they cause in the meantime, from their perspective, is an added bonus. Not the intended goal of their short-to-midterm plans.

With that said, they want de-pop, either by the jabs and/or at a later time by other means (which of these would become obvious with time, provided their plans aren't stopped).

There is an argument for why significant depop-by-jab isn't a good route for them to go down, yet, given they don't have full control yet and it has the potential to awaken the population against them before they can achieve their goals.

Given that Ivermectin would significantly reduce the rate of ADE amongst our jabbed population, it was thus reduce the rate of death and severe injury amongst our people.

These deaths, if allowed to occur (via the continued supression of Ivermectin and other treatments), would be spun as being the fault of the unvaxxed, for "producing the variants", and used as the "justification" for vaxx passports and further booster shots.

So perhaps there is another reason for the smears of Ivermectin. Perhaps they do want many of our vaxxed people to die, sooner-rather-than-later, to advance their current goals (i.e., they're timeline is being rushed).