Reuters Fact-Checkers Lie About Vax Regret Article

A screenshot from an article on IQfy expressing vax regret has gone viral, and the “fact-checkers” at Reuters have lied about it, constructing an elaborate hoax.

The article is entitled “They knew: why didn’t the unvaccinated do more to warn us?”

The article might be satire. It does not read like satire.

They even disabled comments on the post, saying there were too many trolls posting.

That could be part of the joke, I guess. But it’s very elaborate.

I have never heard of A brief look at the site shows that it is not all satire, but this article could be satirical.

Regardless, even if it is intended as satire, Reuters “fact-checkers” openly lied about the post. Someone created and distributed a fake screenshot of an article with the same title and header image for “The Conversation.” Reuters then covered this, and claimed that the article was fake.

Reuters writes:

A screenshot purporting to show a future headline for an article published by The Conversation asks why the “unvaccinated did not do more to warn” people who were inoculated with a COVID-19 vaccine, but it is fabricated.

The Conversation is a website that publishes articles written by academics and edited by journalists. The publication’s logo is visible at the top left corner of the fake screenshot, with a headline that reads: “THEY KNEW: Why didn’t the unvaccinated do more to warn us?”

The circulated screenshot is dated June 6, 2023, five months in the future at the time of this writing.

In the image, a cover graphic features cartoon figures, with two in medical attire holding vaccines while the other two figures can be seen holding hands toward the medical personnel in a gesture of rejection.

The opening paragraph visible across the lower third of the screenshot reads: “While well intending citizens lined up, did the right thing, and received their COVID19 vaccinations, now known to do more harm than good, their unvaccinated friends and family stood by and let them do it. Even though they knew what we didn’t. Some of them said too little. Some said nothing at all. Our blood is now on their hands

Reuters then cites this tweet from the known weirdo and rat fink Ramz Paul:

Ramz Paul is a sick person, and I believe he is likely some kind of government agent. Seriously, this guy is one of the single most bizarre and fundamentally dishonest individuals I’ve ever run across on the internet. It is no surprise that he is a part of this psyop.

Why would he make a fake screenshot of a real article and post that? What would compel someone to do something like that, under any circumstances, other than attempting to help these fact-check hoaxers?

I’ve been saying for a long, long time that the fact-checkers do exactly this: put out fake versions of something real, and then “debunk” their own fakes. This is similar to the way that anti-virus software makers in the 1990s allegedly made viruses for the purpose of getting people to buy their software.

This is them being caught red-handed.

And before someone says “well, maybe someone saw the fake screen shot and wrote a real article based on it?”


Google archive shows that the article was originally posted on December 2, 2022.

Therefore, the fake screenshot, which appears to have been originally posted by Ramz Paul, was copied off of this IQfy article.

This is the way 95% of this “fact-checking” works – they find (or, very likely, create themselves) slightly wrong versions of real things and then debunk the fake thing without mentioning the real thing. The other 5% is fact-checking the Babylon Bee or other known satire sites, or just doing retarded stuff like “debunking” Donald Trump’s claim that injecting bleach cures the coronavirus.

This whole “fact-check” industry which popped up after the 2016 election is a gigantic scam. I’ve been fact-checking these fact-checkers for years, and the depths to which they will sink is an outrage.