It’s not paranoia if someone’s really out to get you

My Substack metrics have gone from bad to worse. I can’t help but wonder if this might be explained by certain taboo subjects I write about.

I’m not sure if I’m on the radar screen of those who want to expand the control of the State, but my “Spider Sense” has certainly been piqued.

Egads! I just looked at my Substack dashboard and discovered I’ve LOST 12 paid subscribers in the last two weeks.

For background or context, in the first four or five months of my two-year-old Substack, I averaged 27 new paid subscribers every month. For the last several months, I was adding only one to three new paid subscribers/month but, suddenly, I’ve hit full reverse.

Once upon a time, my article Open Rate was 45 percent. (This figure means that almost half of subscribers who received one of my articles actually opened and then, maybe, read my efforts to save the world). Today, my Open Rate has plummeted to 30 to 33 percent. 

On the positive side of the Substack ledger, my total subscriber figure is at a record high (6,660) of which 297 are paid (previously 309).

The number of “story reads” my articles generate ranges from 3,500 to 7,000 … So a respectable number of people are still being exposed to my articles.

Based on Reader Comments, “likes,” number of cross-posts and shares, I haven’t “lost my Mojo.”

Still, I’m sitting here wondering if my Substack Mojo has taken a sabbatical  … or if nefarious trends/forces might somehow be working against me. I don’t know the answer, but with this piece I’ll outline a few areas of my journalism that might have put me on Big Brother’s “threat” list.

I can think of many topics I’ve routinely written about that might make me unpopular with protectors of the Status-Quo. Three of these topics include:

Early Spread isn’t as trivial a scandal as most people think

I’m probably best-known as the “early spread” Covid contrarian writer. Everybody needs a niche and I found one with my hypothesis that the novel coronavirus had, almost certainly, been infecting millions of people weeks and months before the lockdowns to “slow or stop” virus spread.

To me, investigative journalism exploring this theory should not be off-limits. A “search for the truth” should always be viewed as a noble undertaking.

Still, my hypothesis is more thermo-nuclear to the Establishment than many people might imagine. This is because this theory - if confirmed or proven - would tell the world the novel coronavirus was never “deadly” or anything the vast majority of citizens should fear.

As a recap, if this virus was infecting many people as early as September, October and November 2019 - and there was no noticeable spike in “all-cause deaths” - what we might have had was a contagious virus … that wasn’t killing hardly anyone.

In other words, early Covid was no different than a typical flu season - and, previously, the world had not panicked over a flu season.

There was no need for lockdowns or an experimental mRNA vaccine. We didn’t need to give Pfizer shareholders the gift of an $XX billion stock bonus. Nor did we need to give unelected public health bureaucrats like Anthony Fauci cate-blanche control over our daily lives.

What my early-spread articles are really saying is that we shouldn’t “trust the experts.” We shouldn’t have trusted them in March 2020 and we shouldn’t trust the same people and organizations this week or next year.

While a guess, I imagine the above sentence is not the message the world’s real rulers want their subjects to receive.

I also keep writing about the embalmers’ clots …

I’ve also probably distinguished myself from most Substack authors with my repeated efforts to raise awareness of the “embalmers’ clots.”

If there’s one scandal that would immediately end the non-stop effort to get millions of people to continue to get Covid “vaccines” and boosters, it’s the knowledge that these shots are producing these things in the arteries and veins of millions of people.

Think about it. If the majority of the world’s population realized our “trusted” health and science experts don't care a lick about this injection “side effect,” these experts would be fleeing to their New Zealand bug-out shelters months before they got indicted for “crimes against humanity.”

Furthermore, if these leaders were covering up a truth this “grotesque,” most people would belatedly realize the same “leaders” have no doubt been covering up countless other scandals almost as monstrous and diabolical.

As I’ve written more than one time, it’s not one specific scandal the Powers That Be want to block … it’s all the other unexposed scandals as well.

Anyway, if my hyper focus on the embalmers’ clots has won me any friends, these admirers are not members of the Deep State.

In fact, I’ve come to believe that throttling the influence of dissident writers is the key to the operation for the Censorship Cadre.

And I’ve focussed on Substack itself

It also occurs to me that I’ve probably written more stories about alarming trends on Substack than 99.9 percent of my Substack colleagues.

I admit I’m not 100-percent sure that certain Substack authors may have been targeted for narrative-control operations, but as I keep writing, my “Spider Sense” tells me this is a distinct possibility.

This might not matter if the mainstream media wasn’t 100-percent captured, but every thinking person knows every mainstream journalism organization is providing cover for every bogus and toxic narrative. 

This means the only significant cohort of truth-seeking writers is working, primarily, here at Substack. If certain Substack authors are now “under attack,” this would also qualify as disturbing and alarming change.

A rogue journalist who raises the possibility Substack might not be the beacon of free speech many of us hoped it would be, might, theoretically, be considered a “threat” to our Orwellian friends.

If an article makes you nervous, it’s probably important …

I once wrote an article where I mentioned that, with just about every article I write, I get butterflies before I hit the “send” or “post” button.  If an article makes you nervous - because you know it will not be popular with powerful people - you should go ahead and hit “send,” I wrote.

Seriously, if you’re the type person who recoils from “speaking truth to power,” why do you insist on calling yourself a “journalist?” (This is actually a form of disinformation).

The alternative is you want to be just like faux journalists at The New York Times, Washington Post, Gannett, CNN, NBC and CBS.

Question: When was the last times a New York Times’ journalist or editor posted a Covid story where the author said, “Uh oh … Anthony Fauci, the WEF and the CEO of Pfizer are going to hate me for posting this story?”

Answer: Never.

Even with this story - published in the hopes I might actually get a few new paid subscribers, my real thought is: “Oh, sh*t, how many subscribers is this going to cost me?”

*** (Fighting back with this button!) ***

That’s maybe enough examples …

I’ll stop with these three examples of story subjects that might have put me on the apostate, “dangerous extremist” or “science denier” list of nefarious disinformation spreaders.

However, I think anyone could pick 10 of my stories at random, read them, and reach the conclusion that what we have here is an author who calls BS on virtually every important, society-controlling narrative. 

(For example, I don’t think admirers of the great “wife-supporter” Doug Emhoff were amused by my last story).

*** (Readers who share my articles have kept my “story reads” at a fairly respectable level) ***

A wise person once observed that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This maxim, in my opinion, is the gospel truth.

If this is true, what would people and organizations who have obtained such power actually do with it?

Would they be likely to use this power to serve humanity or would they be more likely to use this power to commit even more crimes (because they know nobody who matters can stop them)?

Is it possible such people actually don’t care if a few journalists are trying - daily, in any way they can - to expose them and take away all the perks they’ve accrued and, perhaps, thwart their unfinished plans?

No, I think this possibility probably concerns the world’s real rulers (and might even piss them off).

While I’m a small-fry contrarian journalist - at least at one time - my “brand” was growing. If this trend continued, my influence might even grow. Other journalists might start to write about the taboo topics I write about.

This column might be paranoia, but I don’t think the villains in most of my articles have a laissez faire attitude towards free speech and muck-racking journalists. If they can “mess with” journalists and public figures who threaten their positions and future programs, they probably will.

If I knew what was good for me, I might raise the white flag and go apply for a job at Wal-Mart. But some little voice inside my head keeps telling me to keep hitting that “send” button. 

So, here goes …

***

(When it comes to asking for a sale, you’ve already got “no in your pocket;” go ahead and ask … you might get a “yes.”)

One-time Ko-Fi donations greatly appreciated!