The Gatekeepers Club

[Z...]

This is very long and very excessive, i still haven’t read all the case infos.
Some that I read open interesting questions / like Dolores Cahil’s case.
Some assessments I agree with - like Rainer Fulmich for example- and if I am not mistaken he also defrauded his own committee.
Seems this whole truth movement is a veritable mine field - and constant let down with perpetual mudslinging
( remember Shiva Ayyadurai feud with Robert Kennedy jr.) or people being exposed for frauds etc. Quite tiring actually.

However I am certainly not a virus denier, i think terrain theory is very interesting but falls short in explaining everything that we know.
Seems they lumped on this list everyone who believes viruses exist.

In any case I am interested what great minds of this forum think about all this.

The Gatekeepers Club

Leading the walking dead into eternity

dpl003.substack.com

 

[Alejo]

Uh I don't know.. the author seems to be a bit all over the place calling everyone a gatekeeper.

I did not read the entire article, I glanced at it but this was the first red flag:

I also find it important, before we jump into the list, to highlight, however controversial you might find it, that anyone that recommends Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are either useful idiots or gatekeepers. This might stop symptoms in the short term but once you better understand wellbeing you will realize that treating symptoms is not helping you at all, especially in the long run. The below videos has a lot more information on the subject:

And he links to a few videos, why not explain it simply if it is such a succinct and clear conclusion? I understand that treating a symptom isn't a solution, but those medicines do not only treat symptoms. But also, sometimes it's the symptoms being severe that kill an individual, so treating them is a good idea. And also, sometimes the symptom is the illness, a headache due to dehydration for instance, gets treated by drinking water, not by iv fluid.. but I digress.

My first thought was: "only a Sith deals in absolutes" but also, he could've fooled me if he said he was quoting CNN. Then he goes on to lump everyone.. and I do think I mean everyone as a gatekeeper. McCollough, Robert Malone, RFK Jr, Project Veritas, Judy Mikovits, David Icke...? even Jordan Peterson, of whom he says.. "He gets a lot of social media promotion, a clear sign".. what? that's it? And Zelenko is a gatekeeper.. but he provides no information (or it's forthcoming), but he's a gatekeeper. I was surprised to have not seen Joe Rogan, but I do get the sense..... gatekeeper.

From what I can gather he subscribes to the notion that there's no virus, which is one thing to consider and discuss at length, but a red flag. It's one thing to ponder about the plausibility of a theory, and another entirely to adopt it and then declare everyone who disagrees with you a gatekeeper, kind of feels like the flat earth.. if you clearly don't see the earth is flat, then you're a gatekeeper or a useful idiot.

On the other hand, he completely misses the nuance of how people think and operate, because they said something that disagrees with him, then they're gatekeepers, they couldn't be wrong or misinformed but well intentioned, or in the process of learning.. nope, gatekeeper virus pushers all of them.

That attitude kind of makes me want to ignore him, and while I am sure he probably has hit the nail in the head in some instances, it's the lumping and the extremity of the approach that makes it kind of not worth exploring, in my opinion.